The life work of John L. Girardeau, D.D., LLd. : late professor in the Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Columbia, S.C.

;^

^^

Calumbia E^niDcrj^itp

intl)e(£ttpofJlftugark

THE LIBRARIES

Bequest of

Frederic Bancroft

1860-1945

THE LIFE WORK

OF

JOHN L GIRARDEAU, D.D.,LL.D,

Late Professor in the Presbyterian Theological Seminary,
Columbia, S. C.

COMPILED AND EDITED
BY

GEORGE A. BLACKBURN, D. D.

Columbia, S. C.

THE STATE COMPANY

1916.

.f V2.^i

Q.H'^

Copyright 1916

BY

The State Company.

mi^^^

CO

LO

92

CO

^ TABLE OF CONTENTS

CD

" Page

Preface 5

Chapter I. — Ancestry and Boyhood ... 7

By George A. Blackburn, D. D.

Chapter II. — Conversion and Early Ministry 22
By George A. Blackburn, D. D,

Chapter III. — Work Among the Negroes — I . 31

By Edward C. Jones
Work Among the Negroes — II 51

By Joseph B. Mack, D. D.
Work Among the Negroes — III 72

By George A. Blackburn, D. D.

Chapter IV.— Confederate ChapLain ... 106
By D. W. McLaurin

Chapter V.— Pastorate After the War . . 133
By Thomas H. Law, D. D.

Chapter VI. — Seminary Professor .... 164
By William T. Hall, D. D.

Chapter VII.— The Presbyter 208

By R. A. Webb, D. D., LL. D.

Chapter VIII. — Evolution Controversy . . . 231
By Robert A. Webb, D. D., LL. D.

Chapter IX.— The Philosopher 285

By Thornton Whaling, D. D., LL. D.

Chapter X.— The Theologian 304

By Thornton Whaling, D. D., LL. D.

4 Contents.

Page
Chapter XI. — Examples of Poems and Other

Writings 341

By George A. Blackburn, D. D.

Chapter XII.— The Man 366

By George A. Blackburn, D. D.

Appendix 393

Index 429

By Thornton Whaling, D. D., LL. D.

PREFACE

This book is not intended to be an ordinary biog-
raphy. Dr. Girardeau belonged to a Church and to an
age that gave the world an unusual number of extra-
ordinary men, many of whose lives have already been
written, covering, in a general way, the most important
events that occurred in his time and locality. Its pur-
pose, therefore, is supplemental, showing who he was,
and what part he performed in the great movements
of his day.

It presents him chiefly in action, and covers only
parts of his life. It has been written, for the most
part, by men who were associated with him during the
times they have described, and by agreement with the
Editor, each author has been perfectly free to express
his individual opinions. This method has its dis-
advantages, especially in its tendency to repetition;
but it also has its advantages in giving the reader more
confidence in the correctness of the representations
made of the man and of his work, especially, when he
understands that some of the writers were in agreement
with him in the greater part of his principles and con-
troversies, while an almost equal number opposed him
in some of his most serious contentions.

It also meets Dr. Girardeau's own ideas in reference
to the public display of the more tender emotions.
There is reason to believe that he destroyed practically
all of his correspondence, and a great deal of other per-
sonal matter to prevent any one from writing a biogra-
phy of him in the common form.

Some will think that this book should have appeared
before so many of his friends had died. The editor,

6 The Life Work of

however, has delayed its publication to meet the genera-
tion of those who came after him, witli the hope that his
influence might in some measure be extended over them

also.

George A. Blackburn.

Columbia, S. C,

June 10, 1916.

CHAPTER I

ANCESTRY AND BOYHOOD

By George A. Blackburn, D. D.

Persecution, when endured for Christ's sake, has
always produced a noble type of man. It brings out
all the strong points of national character, and fixes
them as permanent qualities to be propagated from
generation to generation. The Babylonish persecution
has kept the Jew free from idolatry to this day. The
persecutions endured by the Scots and the non-Con-
formists of England have left a stamp, in the love of
religious liberty, that no age will ever be able to efface.
The persecution of the Huguenots brought out an
unusual number of splendid qualities in that remark-
able people. This was due to the distinctive qualities
of the French mind, and to the special characteris-
tics of the French disposition. When powerfully acted
upon by the Gospel, and then subjected to the fierce
fires of a pitiless persecution, there came forth a people
strong of mind and heart, intense in their Calvinism,
rigid in their discipline, pure in their lives, unbending
in their loyalty, ardent in their zeal, tender in their
sympathies, and magnetic in their personalities. Driven
from their native land by the Edict of Nantz, they
were scattered, by the providence of God, among all
the nations holding the Protestant faith, to enrich by
their experience and by their spirituality all Christi-
anity.

In this illustrious company were the ancestors of
John L. Girardeau. In the History of the Huguenot

8 The Life Work of

Emigration to America.^ Baird says : "Jean Girardeau
came from Talmont, a neighboring town near the
Saine coast." That is, near La Chaume, on the coast
of Poitoii. This was also the birthplace of Benjamin
Marion, ancestor of Francis Marion. In a foot note
Baird says: "John Girardeau, born at Talmont in
Poitou, son of Peter Girardeau and Catherine
Lareine." Kamsey, also, in his history of South Caro-
lina, mentions the fact that the ancestors of the Girar-
deau family, with other persecuted Huguenots, fled
from France after the revocation of the Edict of
Xantz.

The family records begin with the statement that
John Girardeau, son of Isaac Girardeau, was born in
Liberty County, Georgia, March 1, 1756. This Isaac
Girardeau was the great-grand-father of John L.
Girardeau. The family, after spending some time in
South Carolina, moved to Georgia. From here a part
returned to South Carolina, part moved on to Florida,
and a part remained in Georgia. Dr. Girardeau's
grand-father, John, was a soldier in the War of the
Revolution. For some years before his death he was
totally blind. Dr. Girardeau, in the family Bible,
records the fact that he remembered some of the stories
he used to relate concerning his adventures in the war.
He lived to be eighty-one years of age and was a devout
member of the Presbyterian Church.

His grand-mother was Eleanor Dashwood Williams.
She was a member of the Presbyterian Church, and in
the family records it is written of her: "Eead the
Bible constantly. Intelligent and cheerful. Just
before she died the hymn commencing, 'Jesus, lover
of my soul,' was sung at her bedside. She exclaimed,

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 9

'I am safe.' " She was seventy-nine years of age at
her death.

His father was John Bohim Girardeau, who was
born at Toogoodoo, St. Paul's Parish, Colleton Dis-
trict, S. C, October 27th, 1798. He was married to
his first wife on December 16th, 1824, by Dr. A. W.
Leland. Like the other members of his family, he also
was a member of the Presbyterian Church. He died at
Beech Island, S. C, from an attack of influenza, com-
plicated with typhoid fever. In the record of his death
Dr. Girardeau wrote : "It was one of my sweetest
privileges, my dear and honored father, to hold com-
munion with thee on earth; it is one of my fondest
hopes to renew it in heaA^en."

His mother was Claudia Heme Freer, daughter of
Edward and Margaret Freer. She was born on James
Island, S. C, March 17, 1801. She was a member of
the Presbyterian Church, and a woman of extraordi-
nary loveliness of character. She died from country
fever, as it was called, on June 21, 1833. John
Lafayette Girardeau was the eldest son of this mar-
riage. Five other children were born to these parents :
Emily Margaret, Thomas Jefferson, Edward Freer,
who died on his first birthday, Claudia May, and
Edward Freer, the name being the same as that of the
fourth child.

From a second marriage, to Mar}^ Fisher Hughes,
six children were born to his father. They were : Wil-
liam Hughes, John Bohun, Isaac Williams, Mary
Hughes, George Maurice, and Beulah Ellen.

Dr. Girardeau made some notes of his early life and
experiences, in order that they might not slip away
from his memory. These notes contain the only data
from which a history of his early life could be con-

10 The Life Work of

structed. They are largely in brief sentences and catch
words. It will probably be more interesting, and, at
the same time, give a more accurate picture of his
youth, to publish them, in so far as they are intelligi-
ble, just as he has written them. He says:

"I was born on James Island, near Charleston, on
the 14th of November, 1825. Was baptized by Kev.
Dr. A. W. Leland, the pastor of the Presbyterian
Church.

"My earliest recollections are connected with my
mother. On one Sunday afternoon, when I had just
learned to read — about five years old — she called me
to her, and, holding the Bible in her lap, bade me lean
on her knees and read the nineteenth Chapter of
John's Gospel, commencing, 'Then Pilate therefore
took Jesus and scourged Him.' I was very much
affected by the account of the Savior's suft'erings and
cried. She then told me to go up-stairs. I remember
that, as I went, in the midst of tears, I was very vain
of the feeling I had exhibited, and wondered whether
mother would not tell it to others.

"Remember going to the Sabbath School held at the
church. Dr. Leland was generally present and taught
a class himself.

"Father and mother joined the Church after I was
born. I must have been about three or four years old.
They joined under the pastorate of Dr. Leland. Pre-
sented themselves together on same day. There had
been a revival of religion on the Island and many
made a profession of religion. Remember the prayer
meetings which were held at night from house to
house. Used to sit on a bench near my grandmother
(Mrs. Lawton) or mother. Remember Dr. Leland
standing up in a corner near a table and speaking to

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 11

the i^eople. The room used to be filled. The yards
filled with horses and gigs. Dr. Leland used fre-
quently to walk to the meetings. Remember him walk-
ing up the path through the churchyard to the
church; and in the pulpit. Wondered w^hy he did not
strike his hand against the sounding-board when he
gesticulated; that old sounding-board attached to the
low^ ceiling with a large star of different colored wood
let into it.

"Remember well the church; the pew w^here father
and mother sat. Sat sometimes with them and some-
times with Uncle Freer in his square corner pew next
the side door. And that holly tree, wdiose bright red
berries used to hang near the little square window on
the side of the pulpit. I think I see them gleaming
there now. The gentlemen used to stand under two
large red-oak trees and talk before service and make
curious figures on the ground with their sticks. The
boys used to ramble about the churchyard, pulling
sassafras roots to chew and wild violets to 'fight cows'
with their crooked necks; then stroll down the road
and drink water from the ditch, out of bay-leaves.

"Remember Uncle Isaac riding 'old Scott,' grand-
father's old sorrel, to church, and the exquisite satis-
faction with which I would ride him home with
crossed stirrups to 'suit my length.' One day the old
fellow went off with me in a canter and frightened me
dreadfully.

"One afternoon Mr. Osborn preached and spoke
solemnly of eternity. The evening shadows were
lengthening, the woods grew browner, and the sermon,
connected w4th the solemn look of the woods, affected
me very much. One evening cried to go to prayer
meeting with father and mother. It was held at

12 The Life Work of

'Uncle Jackey's'. Mr. Osborn lectured, and, on being
told that I begged to come on that cold night, praised
me for it.

"When about five years old, was sent to school to
Mr. Kawlins Rivers, who taught the only school on
the Island. 'Head and foot' plan. Used to stimulate
the ambition of the scholars. Kemember being required
by my father to give account of my standing in the
classes. Great tribulation to be 'taken down,' and
obliged to report to him. Studied lessons along the
road from school home. Carpenters spelling. — 'ache,
a pain': 'adze, a carpenter's axe.'

"Remember that cow that I tried to scare by jump-
ing at her ; how she plunged up to me and there stood
dancing up and down, shaking her head and threaten-
ing to gore me to death every instant. Tommy was
over the fence in a jiffy and left me to scuffle for
myself. But the creature, after letting me know what
she could do with me if she pleased, quietly walked
off, to my great relief. Providence spared my life
then. It would have been as easy for her to have killed
me as to have gi\^n her horn an extra push. The
plaid cloak fluttered in vain.

"Remember, too, how Aldrich pushed me headlong
into the pond when I was on my knees drinking water.
Spared again.

"Remember, too, upon first trying to swim at the
'swimming place,' Fort Johnson, how I was just about
to drown, when Sun rescued me; and how the grey
mare ran away with me down the 'Bluff Road,' with-
out saddle or bridle, and not even a handkerchief or
grape vine in her mouth; how I jumped off, thinking
she was going down into the creek, and, falling on my

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 13

head, could scarcely rise or see; how the boys on their
horses seemed to be away up in the sky.

"Remember, too, how afterwards, in St. Thomas', I
was thrown heels over head and nearly killed by the
fall ; how, in Montague Street, I was precipitated from
a tree and the breath knocked out of me; the fall, too,
from old Bob near the barn in St. Thomas', when the
gun broke in twain under me; and on the Island,
how the ox, 'Old Pallux,' gored me in the temple ; the
fall from a horse, too, in Christ Church Parish at the
bridge near Mitton Ferry, thrown clear over his head
and nearly run over by him.

" 'When in the slippery paths of youth
With heedless steps I ran,
Thine arm unseen conveyed me safe
And led me up to man.'

"When about seven years old, swore dreadfully at a
playmate; so loudly that I was heard at a distance.
Mother dispatched Lem for me, who carried me, fight-
ing and screaming, to her. She took me into her room,
and corrected me soundly. Remember it with grati-
tude. It did me good. Thank God for a mother who
was fond and tender but would not suffer sin in her
children. I remember no other chastisement received
from her. Afterwards, years afterwards, was led by
bad company to use profane language but only occa-
sionally. That correction, I have reason to believe,
was the means of deterring me from forming the habit
to any great degree. Remember, long after, being
rebuked by schoolmaster for using profanely the name
of the blessed Savior.

"When I Avas seven years old dear mother died. We
were playing on the grass-plot in front of Aunt Eliza-
beth's, when some one came and told us she was dying.

14 The Life Work or

Strange sound ! Tommy and I went into the house
and stood in the passage-way by the door of her cham-
ber. The room was full of people. It was an after-
noon in June, about four o'clock. There she lay, pale
and speechless. Father was at the head of the bed, ill
himself, too weak to succeed in getting on the bed;
she beckoned to Uncle Edward and pointed to her
children, who were standing near the bed, as much as
to sa}', 'Let nothing harm them when I am gone.' She
then gave her hand in a last farewell which she could
not speak, but which she tenderly looked, to father,
and, afterwards, to her children and relatiATs succes-
sively, and, having thus bidden them all good-bye, she
quietly closed her eyes and fell asleep in Jesus' arms.
I think I see it all now. Afterwards father went into
another room and I lay beside him on the bed. Rev.
Mr. Edward Buist was with him and offered prayer,
kneeling by his bed.

"The funeral took place next afternoon, in the meet-
ing house at Fort Johnson. It rained furiously. Mr.
Buist preached; a solemn hymn was sung, they lashed
the coffin on the carriage part of a gig, and the mourn-
ful procession moved off. They took the body to the
Presbyterian Church in the Island and carried it to
the east side of the churchyard. Father afterwards
erected a tomb covered by a marble slab, which stands
to this day, though not as at first, alone.

"To this day, her memory is held in honor by those
who knew her. Often have I been asked b}^ the poor
negroes on the Island, 'Are you Miss Claudy's child?'
'Yes.' 'Bless you. Your mudder was a good woman !'
She was kind to everybody, especially to sick and
needy negroes. Often did she send me with a plate of
breakfast to old 'Daddy Prince.' One morning, as I

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 15

went to carry him his breakfast, I found the old man,
propped against the wall — dead. I have never heard
an evil word said of her. She bore the character of an
humble, sweet-tempered, useful follower of the Lord
Jesus.

"In the death of our dear mother I recognize one of
the most marked dealings of Providence with me, as
with the other members of the family. After her
death our relations changed. A new complexion was
imparted to our whole subsequent life. With her life
terminated one distinct section of my own. There a
monument was raised which designated the end of one
period and the commencement of another. And now,
in looking back upon it, and reviewing the part of my
life intervening between her death and the present
time, I think I can distinctly see how it has worked
for ultimate good. I humbly believe the Lord intended
it so. We lost the benefit of her motherly care and
instruction, but we gained the benefit of tuition in the
school of affliction; and eternity alone will reveal how
important that discipline was.

"I continued to attend the school of Mr. Rivers until
I was ten years old. Lived part of the time with Aunt
Elizabeth and part with Uncle Freer. Father had a
situation under the government at Fort Johnson, and
continued planting on the Island. While we were
living with 'Uncle Jackey' — John Limbaker — one day
news was brought down to the Fort that he had
dropped dead in his field. Several gentlemen imme-
diately went up and found it even so. I remember
their bringing his body down, and taking it up the
front steins into his room. He was buried beside his
wife, Ann Baker Limbaker, at the Presbyterian
Church on the Island. She was a daughter of Grand-

16 The Life Work of

father Girardeau by his first wife, who was Mary
Wescoat. They were both members of the Presby-
terian Church, and bore the character of humble and
consistent Christians. Remember well his holding
family worship early every morning. The servants,
whom I remember as being in his family, were Sally,
Maria, Chloe, Philip and 'Driver Isaac' Remember
his early horn ! How many associations cluster around
the sound of that horn ! Seldom hear a horn at day-
light now without thinking of the sweet sound of
'Driver Isaac's' morning call.

"Remember the tall locust trees. The little gate with
sole-leather hinges that swung in the bottom of a glass
bottle. The eager game of 'shinny;' the pond. The
turke3^s and Jerusalem oak — old Marm Bella on the
road side, with her pocket of groundnuts and her
roasted potatoes. The tall china-brier shoots, our
'sparrow grass,' the 'whoop and hide' by moonlight,
and the race of cows at night. There is Uncle Jackey
dressing by the 'dresser,' 'tis scarcely day, he hasn't his
coat or waistcoat on yet. See his suspenders connected
by that bridge in the middle of his back. 'Get up,
there, you lazy fellows, if you don't I'll give you some
of this water!' Splash ! Oh, then the rush for panta-
loons. There is the little table in the corner. The big
Bible covered with cloth is opened, the chapter read,
then we kneel down. Take a peep from our chairs at
him, see his round spectacle-glasses. ^Ye are at the
Fort — he stands near his house and astonishes the boys
by heaving a clam shell to 'The Hill.' Prodigious !
The Hill has come nearer noAv. A boy might fling a
shell across where we sailed our shingle boats, 'strung
off' with feathers of white and black and red, plucked
from the hens and pullets.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 17

"Remember the landing of shingles for the new
church. They were put on the beach just in front of
father's house. William and his new song just imported
from 'Town': 'Dan, dan — a — who? Dan — da monkey,
oh.' As he sings he strikes his knees together. Won-
derful ! There is Tommy in his little blue and speckled
frock. Some one taunts him with it: Was it Mr.
Hinson? The surf pitches in and dashes up the float-
ing shingles. The boat rocks but the song goes on
merrily and the pile gets bigger.

"Remember the afternoon that the mad dog came
trotting along and bit 'Fox,' Uncle Freer's best horse,
and 'Chester,' his fine large dog? See them throwing
Fox down. They brand him with a hot iron, but the
noble fellow lies down and dies. Chester dies, too.
'Sheep-driver,' splendid fellow, how he frets to go !
'Nappy tandy,' too, how he makes the gig spin ! 'Jim
Crow.' They let him out of the stable. See him tear-
ing down the beach sending his heels high in the air
at every jump.

"Remember the sand hills on the back beach. The
swims, the rolls, the gloomy looking 'tower.' Soldiers
used to be flogged there. Old Nich'las and the jersey-
wagon, the ride to grand-father's at Wappoo. The
tenderness of mother for the horse, her getting out and
walking in order to relieve him. Old "Daddy Saturday,"
Mr. Roy all's driver, coming along the woodside, whip
tied on his shoulder. Dread of him, scampering. Rides
to Mr. Buist's on Saturday — Shorter Catechism.
'Whoop and Hide' at night : 'One's all, two's all, zig-
zole-zam; bob-tail, bob-tail, tickle 'um, tan; ha-rum,
scarum, mujum, marum, France! You are out.'
Remember at one of these plays Furman Witter, using
the word 'excepting,' and my being gravelled by it,

18 The Life Work of

wondering why he did not use the word 'except' with-
out the 'ing.'

"The following scholars were at the school on James
Island, taught by Mr. Kivers: Arabella Kivers, Sarah
Ann Rivers, Caroline Rivers, Emma Witter, Furman
Witter, James B. Witter, Benjamin Witter, Ralph
Holmes, Caroline Holmes, Sarah Palmer Holmes, Wil-
liam Jeffords, Washington Jeffords, Joseph Jeffords,
Edward Freer, Marion Freer, Adeline Rivers, Abra-
ham Limbaker, John Limbaker, Isaac Limbaker,
Joseph Turnbull, Aldrich, Jackson Hendlen, Thomas
A. Hendlen, Mary Hendlen, James Lawton, Joseph
Mikell, Elizabeth Royall, Cornelia Royall, Leland
Rivers, Josephine Rivers, Eliza Rivers, and John L.
Girardeau.

"On November 20, 1834, father was married to Miss
Mary Fisher Hughes of Charleston. Very soon after
'Ma,' Grandmother Lawton, died! Remember the
morning in the 'shed-room' when they came and told
us, while in bed, that she was dead. Went over to the
'other house,' as Uncle Freer's was called by us. There
was uncle, sitting by the chimney in his room. AYent
into the next room, and there, where I had often slept
in the same bed w^th her, lay her poor body in death.
Buried in the Presbyterian churchyard near the road
on the southwest side.

"When I was ten years old I was sent to Charleston
and placed at the school of the German Friendly
Society in Archdale Street. Was taught by Joseph
Theus Lee, Esq. Boarded in the family of Mrs. Beulah
Hughes, mother of father's wife, northeast corner of
Tradd and Orange Streets. This was in January, 1836.
Here commenced a new and important era in my life.
My associations were all changed. I was elated at first

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 19

at the prospect of going to live in 'Town.' But one or
two days sufficed to cool my ardor, and soon the home
of my childhood haunted me by night and day, and
I shed many a tear after I lay down at night. Begged
father to take me back into the country, did not wish
to live in town. He refused; bitter, bitter disappoint-
ment. I was now almost left to take care of myself
m every respect. Attended the Sabbath School of the
Second Presbyterian Church, where I gained religious
knowledge. Teacher, Mr. Patterson, kind man, remem-
ber him with gratitude. Remember Mr. Tom Vardell,
the Superintendent. Scholars in same class, Sam
Turner, Martin McMaster and Charles Scanlan.

"Remember that lonely garret — the water — the rats
that used to come and drink at night. Their terrible
races and scuffles in the 'cuddy,' and over the room.
That terrible racket on the staircase made by one with
a huge potato which he lugged up step by step. The
straits to which I was reduced — waking up early in
the morning and studying lessons in bed by first light
of day. Baths at the pump. Allowance! Rations.
Rice cake ! Prayers by the fire. That short Psalm.
Cold nights. Cold Sundays in the garret, sunshine in
the window. Sunday school books. That blue suit,
'all buttoned down before,' those pumps and stockings.
Square corner pew in church. Dr. Smyth. Marshall's
bakery. The play in school yard in morning. Palpi-
tating heart.

"Remained at German School until I was fourteen
years old. Commenced Latin : Gould's Adam's Gram-
mar. Jacob's Latin Reader. Caesar. Virgil. Greek;
Tables of conjugations, declensions, &c. Jacob's Greek
Reader. Grseca Majora. Xenophon's Cyropa?dia. For
a few months before leaving the German School was

20 The Life Work of

taught by Mr. Haslan, who took charge of the school
in place of Mr. Lee, who had lost his father and
appeared to be in a mental condition which incapaci-
tated him for discharging his ordinary duties. He
was troubled with religious melancholia.

"At James Island I was very ambitious. Nearly
always at the head of the class. Mr. Rivers adopted
the plan of incentive to study by appeals to emulation.
This was encouraged by Father, who uniformly
inquired concerning my daily stand at school and
praised or condemned accordingly. When at the
German School found total absence of emulation sys-
tem. No head, no foot, position fixed. Discipline
severe to cruelty. This overthrew all desire to excel
and engendered very soon a reckless disregard for the
teacher and for study. Remember setting my teeth
and resolving not to study; however, did study to some
extent. Dread of the school with the exception of the
play ground. In, sometimes, from eight or nine in the
morning, excepting a brief interval for dinner, until
the ringing of the seven o'clock bell. No love for
study the consequence. Morals of the school generally
excessively low. Lying considered almost a virtue, if
practiced for the purpose of avoiding a flogging.
Maps, handkerchiefs, &c., used to protect vulnerable
parts. These were inserted in the clothing — wonder-
ful dexterity at the art — ounce of prevention worth a
pound of cure. Sometimes detected — wrath, thumb-
nails, palms of the hand. Small bits of paper with
infinitesimal inscriptions condensing the lesson, were
used. Great experience in small writing and small
things generally. Only virtue at a premium, refusal
to inform. A grand, martyr-like quality. Any amount
of scourging taken before this virtue was allowed to

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 21

fail. Non-compliance with this standard ensured
excommunication from the fellowship of the school.
My schoolmates at the German School : Charles Axson,
Sam Brodie, Charles Bolles, Christopher Carsten,
Tom Hewie, James Little, Basil Manly, Tom Wagner,
Tom Eoj^er, John Seigling, — Croft, Harvey Dingle,
Gabriel Wesley Dingle, William Dingle, Ashley C.
Wagner, Sinclair Wagner, Kearney Wagner, Thomas
Eason, Edward C. Jones, — Westendorff, John Back-
man Shiver, — Rowell, John Buckmeyer, Ninian
Drummond, Theodore Smith, — Weyman, William
Plane, Charles Seyle, Florence Seyle, William Smith,
George Smith, Henry Seigling, — Evans, Jas. B.
Evans, — McGarth, — Alexander, Jos. T. Dill, Fur-
man Smith, — Smith, Edward Hume, John Hume,
and Gadsden Hume."

CHAPTER II

CONVERSION AND EARLY MINISTRY

By George A. Blackburn, D. D.

Young Girardeau graduated from the High School
when he was between fourteen and fifteen years of age.
That fall he entered the Charleston College. Here
begins his spiritual life. At the end of the "Memoirs
of Thomas HaWburton'' he has left the following tes-
timony : ''Over and over again have I read this
remarkable dying experience. Lord, help me in my
last hour! Calvin, Owen, Witsius, Halyburton and
Thornwell have been among the chief of my instruc-
tors. The account of Wilberforce Richmond's dying
experience in Grimshaw's 'Legh Richmond's Domestic
Portraiture,' was the proximate instrument in the
hands of the ever blessed Spirit of leading me to
believe in Jesus. It was at the north corner of King
Street and Price's Alley in Charleston. Oh, the unut-
terable rapture of that hour when I found him, after a
month's conflict with sin and hell ! The heavens and
the earth seemed to be singing psalms of praise for
redeeming love."

In an old Bible the following record was found:
"J. L. Girardeau joined Third Presbyterian Church,
Charleston. S. C, October 18th, 1840. Aged fourteen
years and eleven months."

Dr. Girardeau's account of that awful month of con-
viction was enough to send terror to any unconverted
soul. He had just entered college when a gloom like
that of eternal night fell upon his soul. His conscience

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 23

pointed to his sinful nature, the unbearable holiness of
God, and the flaming bar of judgment. In everything
about him he saw the warnings of coming vengeance,
while the lurid glare of an eternal hell was ever before
his fervid imagination. His case seemed hopeless. He
could not see how any one would want to laugh; he
could not see how any one could enjoy a life that was
nothing more than a vestibule to the dungeon of eter-
nal woe. He was afraid to put out his light at night
lest the darkness should never end. He was afraid to
go to sleep lest he should awake in the company of the
damned. He had no appetite for food. He could not
study. No earthly thing interested him. He spent his
time reading the Bible, calling on God for mercy and
bemoaning his lost estate. In vain did he strive to
make peace with God ; he wept over the consequences
of his sins, but there was no sense of pardon ; he tried
to repent and reform, but there was no peace ; he strove
to make covenants and agreements with God, but the
earth was iron and the heavens were brass. One beauti-
ful morning while on his knees begging for mercy, it
occurred to him that he had already done everything
that it was possible for him to do, and that all of these
things had availed him nothing. He would, therefore,
just surrender himself to Jesus and leave the case in
his hands. This was faith. Instantly the Holy Spirit
assured him that he was accepted in Christ, that his
sins were forgiven, and that God loved him with an
everlasting love. He sprang to his feet, clapped his
hands and poured out the overflowing joy of his soul in
praise. All nature had changed. In the description
of his feelings he said that the sun shone brighter, the
birds sang sweeter, and the breezes blew softer than
he had ever known tfeem to do. His flesh as well as

24 The Life Work of

his heart felt the delight of the presence of a recon-
ciled God. He could see no reason why any intelligent
creature could care to do anything in this world but
love and praise God. This happy condition continued
for two or three days, and then, by reason of some
compromising course, this strange and delightful expe-
rience passed away, so slowly that it was gone before he
realized it.

This experience left its stamp on his whole life. The
trace of that month, with its horrors and its joys, can
be seen in his thinking, his preaching, and his living.
It explains in a measure the awful vividness with
which he would describe the terrors that would befall
the wicked, and the inexpressible delight that would
come to the believer at the appearing of the Lord
Jesus.

He graduated from the Charleston College in the
spring of 1844. He had not only been a fine student,
but he was a splendid athlete, able to hold his own in
any of the games and exercises of his day. His class-
mates were Charles Henry Axson, Charles Patterson
Bolls, Adolphus Brantly, James Kandolph Burns,
William Bell Corbett, William Tertius Capers, Thomas
Hansome Grimball, Theodore Samuel Marion, Arthur
Robinson, and Samuel Olin Tally.

Immediately after his graduation he accepted the
position of tutor in the family of Mr. Thomas Hamlin,
about eight miles from Charleston, in Christ Church
Parish. There were four children under his instruc-
tion. One of these, Penelope Sarah, a miss of about 15
years, was especially interesting to her 19-year-old
teacher. He taught in the family during that summer
only, but when he left the teacher and the pupil

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 25

were engaged to be married. That fall he accepted a
school on James Island, and while there transferred
his membership from the Third Presbyterian Church
of Charleston to the Independent Church on the
island. After one year's teaching he entered, in 1845,
the Columbia Theological Seminary, from which he
graduated three years later. At the Seminary he came
in contact with Thornwell, the brilliant professor and
preacher in the South Carolina College. Dr. B. M.
Palmer was at that time preaching to delighted audi-
ences at the First Presbyterian Church in Columbia,
where most of the students from the Seminary
attended. Dr. Thornwell was preaching to the college
students at the College Chapel. Here young Girardeau
and two or three other students attended with unfail-
ing regularity. He gave these college sermons credit
for giving shape and form to his theology.

As a student he was zealous in mission work in and
near Columbia. On one occasion he was passing a field
in which a number of boys were playing ball. Such a
desecration of the Sabbath was abhorrent to him.
Walking out near where the boys were playing, he took
off his hat and began to sing a familiar hymn. He was
a splendid musician and had in his youth a voice as
sweet as the notes of a flute. In a few minutes the boys
were all standing around him. He made them a little
talk on his own work and spoke to them of the danger
of Sabbath desecration, closing with a request that they
go to their homes. As he turned on his way to his mis-
sion, the boys turned quietly back to the city.

He also held meetings in an old shed or deserted
warehouse in the lower part of the city. Here prosti-
tutes and persons of the lowest classes attended his ser-
vices. Some of them professed conversion.

26 The Life Work of

His classmates in the Seminary were G. H. Cart-
ledge, S. R. Frierson, Robert W. Halden, Arnold W.
Miller, Edward P. Palmer, and Joseph D. Porter.

At the end of his second year in the Seminary he
applied to the Presbytery of Charleston to be received
under its call. The record says: *'He was received
under the call of Presbytery with the understanding
that before applying for licensure he transfer his con-
nection from the Independent Church of James Island
to some church in the Presbyterian communion."

The following minutes record his licensure: "These
candidates, after a careful and satisfactory examina-
tion, and having submitted all of the pieces assigned
them, it was resolved that all of their parts of trial be
sustained and Presbytery do now proceed to their
licensure. Therefore the Presbytery of Charleston,
being in session October 9, 1848, did proceed to the
licensure of Messrs. Walker, Girardeau and Miller.
They having severally adopted the confession of faith
of this Church, and satisfactorily answered the ques-
tions appointed to be put to candidates to be licensed."

His first appointment was to preach on the fourth
Sabbath of November, 18J:8, to the Graniteville Church.
This church was supplied every second and fourth
Sabbath by ministers and licentiates of the Presbytery.
He accepted, as his first regular work, an invitation
to supply the pulpit of the Wappetaw Church, an inde-
pendent congregation in Christ's Church Parish, about
seventeen miles from Mt. Pleasant, S. C. Here,
gathered every Sabbath morning, large numbers of
both whites and blacks to hear him preach, some of
them coming from as far as twenty miles away. He
preached first to the white congregation, which always
filled the building. As soon as it withdrew the negi'oes

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 27

filled every available foot of space and he immediately
began another service, preaching, according to many
witnesses, his best sermon to them. On his way back
to Charleston, where he lived, he would ordinarily stop
at some plantation and preach again to the negroes.
His heart sought the salvation of their souls, and he
threw the zeal of his great soul into the work of their
salvation, nor was he without his reward.

In January, 1849, he married Penelope Sarah Ham-
lin, daughter of Thomas and Mary Moore Hamlin, of
Christ Church Parish, South Carolina. This was cer-
tainly a gift from the Lord. He was naturally a spend-
thrift. Money had little value to him, and business
was an intolerable burden. His pocket was open to
every beggar. All that he had was subject to the call
of his friends, and all who sought his friendship were
esteemed by him as his friends. He was so unwilling
to make any profit in his business transactions, espe-
cially with preachers, that he was accustomed to say,
when he had loaned money to any brother minister and
interest was offered, "Dog won't eat dog." On the
other hand, Mrs. Girardeau was careful, economical,
saving. She looked after the expenses and the business
side of life. Although slie had been brought up with
the luxuries that belong to the old Southern plantation,
and believed in living comfortably, when circumstances
allowed, she inherited a disposition that made care-
lessness, waste or any form of prodigality painful to
her.

To them w^ere born ten children — Susan King,
Thomas Hamlin, Edward Heme, John Bohun, Edward
Freer, Claude Heme, Sarah DuPre, Hannah Moore,
William Richmond and Annie Williams. Of these,
John and Claude became elders and Edward an hon-

28 The Life Work of

ored member in the Presbyterian Church; while
Susan, Sarah, and Annie married Presbyterian minis-
ters. Susan married the Rev. Thos. B. Trenholm,
Sarah married the Rev. Robert A. Webb, and Annie
married the Rev. Geo. A. Blackburn.

From the Wappetaw Church he moved to Adams'
Run to accept work in the Wilton Church. The fol-
lowing is the minutes of the Presbytery relating to the
matter: "Barnwell C. H., April 11, 1850. A request
was received from the Wilton Church for the ordina-
tion and ministerial labors of Mr. L.* Girardeau, which
request not being in the usual form, and presenting
some constitutional difficulties. Presbytery did not feel
prepared to act upon it. The Rev. G. Howe, J. H.
Thornwell, D. D., and Elder A. Crawford were
appointed a committee to examine the subject and
bring in a report directing the action of Presbyter^" in
the matter."

This committee reported : "The committee appointed
to prepare a minute for the consideration of Presby-
tery in reference to the application of Mr. Girardeau
for ordination, respectfully submit the following:
'Resolved, That Presbytery regret that the informality
of this application presents certain constitutional diffi-
culties in the way of our acting in the premises. They
would, therefore, respectfully suggest to the church at
Wilton that they present their call for the services of
Mr. Girardeau according to the usual form found in
the Book of Discipline, that it may be regularly laid
before this body; and that they further express their
willingness to be connected with the Presbytery from

*Dr. Girardeau did not add "John" to his name until after he
became a minister. He made this addition with his father's consent,
and for the reason that he did not lilie the name "Lafayette."

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D.

29

whom they seek Mr. Girardeau as their pastor. All
obstacles interposed by our constitution being thus
removed, a meeting of Presbytery will be called with as
little delay as possible for the ordination and installa-
tion of Mr. Girardeau as pastor of said church.' This
report was accepted and Mr. Girardeau was requested
to communicate it to the church."

As a result of this action the Wilton Church asked
to be received under the care of the Presbytery, and
also made out its call for Mr. Girardeau in due form.
The Presbytery met at Wilton Church on June 6, 1850.
There were present the Reverend Messrs. A. A. Porter,
J. B. Adger, J. Douglas, and Ferdinand Jacobs, with
Elders Hugh Wilson, William Barral, A. Campbell
and Hawkins S. King. After his examination and
trial parts had been sustained, a committee was
appointed to provide for his ordination and installa-
tion. The records of the Presbytery say: "After
recess the Presbytery came to order and the committee
of arrangements reported the following order of exer-
cises for ordination, which was adopted and is as fol-
lows : The moderator. Rev. Ferdinand Jacobs, to pre-
side, propose the constitutional questions and make the
prayer of ordination; Rev. A. A. Porter to preach the
sermon ; Rev. J. B. Adger to give the charge to the pas-
tor, and the Rev. John Douglas to give the charge to
the people." This order was carried out on the follow-
ing morning, June 9, 1850.

He remained pastor of Wilton Church for three
years, preaching in the morning to the white people
and ordinarily to the colored people in the afternoon at
one of the nearby plantations, and then again in the
evening to the whites at the village, about two miles
from the church.

30 The Life Work of

In addition to all of this preaching he found time to
study. In 1851 he was appointed to preach to the Pres-
bytery on "Justification." In the same year he was
placed on the committee to examine on Theology. And
in 1852 he was elected moderator of the Presbytery.

In November, 1853, two calls were made for his ser-
vices, one from Columbus, Ga., and the other to take
charge of the work for the negroes in Anson Street,
Charleston, S. C. He visited Columbus first, where his
sermon gave great pleasure to the whole congregation.
One of the elders, thinking that it was too good a ser-
mon for so young a man, asked him if it was entirely
original. That settled the question in so far as Colum-
bus was concerned.

The Anson Street, Charleston, work appealed to him,
for he had already had great success in his work with
the negroes. His heart went out to them, and he deter-
mined to accept the call.

CHAPTER III

WORK AMONG THE NEGROES

By Edward C. Jones.

Eev. Dr. John B. Adger having returned from his
Smyrna Mission, the Second Presb^-terian Church
arranged to transfer their negro membership to him in
a separate church building. The Anson Street edifice
was erected with ReA\ Dr. Adger in charge — the
negroes still retaining their membership under the
care of Rev. Dr. Smyth, it being the hope that the
African race at large would be attracted to this mis-
sion, but the work was not a success. In 1852 Rev. Dr.
Post took a summer vacation and Rev. Dr. Girardeau
was engaged to fill the Circular Church pulpit.* Dur-
ing these services quite a number were attracted to the
ministrations of Dr. Girardeau, and thus opened the
way for his usefulness in Charleston. Rev. Dr. Adger
concluding to withdraw from his mission work. Dr.
Girardeau was induced to take charge of this work, but
with their negro membership still remaining under
Rev. Dr. Smyth's church. To assist Dr. Girardeau, a
call was made from the several Presbyterian churches
for two white members from each to unite with Dr.
Girardeau's work. No response was made, with the
exception of myself, and while my membership was in
the Central Presbyterian Church, I was set aside to
unite with Dr. Girardeau's mission work, to which I
became devotedly attached so that I regularl}^ attended

'A well-known independent church.

32^ The Life Work of

the two weekly night meetings and the three Sabbath
services, and in addition, Dr. Girardeau spent an even-
ing each week at my house to mature plans for carrying
on the work. It soon became evident that with the negro
membership retained in the Second Church, there
could be no growth. After Dr. Girardeau brought the
matter before the Church, since it was agreed that the
Anson Street Mission should be detached from the
parent Church, and a call was made for negro mem-
bers, thirty-six joined the new organization. The
wisdom of this change was soon evident. With a
steady growth the membership was divided into classes,
each under a proper leader. The sick, with a sick fund,
were regularly looked after. The energetic work of
Dr. Girardeau, at the Bible weekly instruction, led
the leading negroes of other churches to admit that the
Anson Street work was "c»/ the Lord.^'

Thus, starting with the thirty-six members in 1854,
there was in 1860 over six hundred enrolled members,
with a regular congregation of 1,500 attendance.

With this large increase, one of the great difficulties
in the work was the ambition of the leaders, who, by
their energ}^ and influence, would bring in new mem-
bers, thus adding to their individual classes so that one
would have a hundred or more, while other leaders,
without gifts or opportunity, would have few in num-
ber. This would give great power to certain men, and
thus in a measure hamper the preacher. After much
study it was arranged that every class would have
twenty regular members especially under the care of a
leader, with an addition of another twenty under an
assistant leader.*

♦This was an amendment of the rules of membership or a mistake
of memory.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 33

When this membership reached the second twenty,
and the assistant leader prove acceptable as to character
and gifts, they would become a regular class under his
full charge. Thus every leader would have free scope
for the extra growth of members, but their number
would never exceed forty. By this plan ample field was
given to the ambition and energy of the leaders, with
assistants in regular training for service. This plan was
found to work with perfect success, and had the war
not closed the mission. Dr. Girardeau could have man-
aged two thousand as easily as two hundred members.

When the mission was well under way there was a
large growth of white attendants who occupied the
side seats next the pulpit. Dr. Girardeau's gifts as a
preacher, and his skill in congregational music,
increased the Sabbath afternoon and night services,
but his management of the choir was subject to much
trouble. The leader of the choir, in order to give a
better field for his select singers, insisted on the con-
trol of the tunes, thus restraining the freedom of the
congregation in singing. Hoping to meet this diffi-
culty, the leader being gifted for the work, Dr. Girar-
deau made a contract with him, paying ten dollars per
month if he would use the tunes that Dr. Girardeau
selected. This was agreed to, but after several months
he notified Dr. Girardeau that he would rather give
up the money and control the tunes himself. In
many cases Dr. Girardeau was forced to lead the sing-
ing himself and thus force the choir to terms.

During the great revival a large number of whites
and blacks were brought to Christ and it soon became
evident that the building must be enlarged. About this
time Col. C. G. Memmenger attended one of the services,
and the day following he sent for me. During my

34: The Life Work of

call he said, "I have been very much impressed with
Mr. Girardeau's intellectual power as a preacher, and
while he has great and special gifts in reaching the
uneducated negro, I want to say to you, as his friend,
that he is doing himself a great injury in his efforts to
bring down his mental gifts to the capacity of his peo-
ple, and unless he can have some suitable field his intel-
lectual power as a preacher will be seriously impaired."
I reported this to Dr. Girardeau, to which he
responded, "I know it, and feel that I waste much of
my mental growth and much valuable time in preach-
ing at the morning service where the attendance is so
small; if I had a morning white audience I would be
able to use my studies, which I am now forced to dilute
to meet the negro mind." A good providence soon
responded to the need of the hour. In a few weeks I
was sent for by Mr. Robert Adger, and to my utter
surprise he said, "I want you to approach Mr. Girar-
deau on a matter that I do not know how he will
receive. I am satisfied that Mr. Girardeau greatly
needs a larger building, and since his revival services
I find it is my duty to place my children under Mr.
Girardeau's teaching; and. if it is possible. I want to
join his Mission Church. I find that Mr. Alex Camp-
bell, F. D. Fanning, J. S. Chambers, and my brother,
Joe Adger, have made up their mind to leave Dr.
Smyth's church and, if possible, unite with that of
Dr. Girardeau. We want you to approach him on
the subject, and if he will accede we will build him a
large church building where he can give us the morn-
ing service. It is likely, however, that Mr. Girardeau
will resist our leaving Dr. Smyth's church, and he
may feel that it will interfere with his negro work."
I saw Mr. Girardeau at once, and on laying the matter

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 35

before him, he at once said, "If this plan proposes in
any way to interfere with our negro work, I will
never agree to their proposition." I pressed upon
him Colonel Memmenger's view — the need of the
church being self-supporting — and the influence of a
regular church organization. He at once accepted this
plan, provided the negro element was assured. All
matters being arranged to his satisfaction, Mr. Adger
erected at once a building on Calhoun Street 80 by 100
feet, one-half of the first story being given to the
whites, the other half to the prayer meeting of the
negroes, and the upi^er floor given wholly to the negroes,
except the side pews and one of the galleries to the
whites, the other gallery being for the overflow of the
negroes.

The church was now regularly organized with
elders and deacons — and up to the war there was a
steady growth of both whites and blacks — with all
machinery for the manao^ement of the larofe neffro con-
gregation so perfect that success was assured in every
department.

In order to show Dr. Girardeau's own view of the
work in its early stages, his report to the Charleston
Presbytery in 1857 will be added as a close to this part
of the chapter.

"As the Missionary in charge of the Anson-Street
Coloured Church, I beg leave respectfully to present
to the Presbytery a report of my labours during the
past year, and of the jDresent condition and prospects
of the enterprise.

"It appears that the opinion expressed with caution
in last year's Report, that the Mission was then mani-
festing an upward tendency, was not unfounded. I
would now, with gratitude to God, mention the fact,

36 The Life AVork of

that the Church has received, during the past year,
encouraging tokens of the Divine favour; and that it
is now in a much more prosperous condition than at
any previous stage of its history. A simple statement
of facts will justify this opinion. Since the Spring
meeting of Presbytery last year, six persons have been
received into the communion of the Church by certifi-
cate, and sixty-one on examination — sixty-seven in all.
At the commencement of the Presbyterial year, the
number of communicants was eighty-eight. It is now
one hundred and forty-five. In May, 1855, the Church
was established, with a membership of forty-eight. It
thus appears that, in two years, after deducting
removals, the number of communicants has been
trebled.

"During the year, we have held two protracted meet-
ings, which were conducted in a regular and orderly
manner, and resulted in great apparent good. One has
just been concluded, having lasted for a fortnight, and
at its close thirteen inquirers applied for instruction
preparatory to admission. There are now about thirty
on the list of candidates, and more applications are
expected. During the year, five members have been
dismissed by certificates ; two have left without having
obtained certificates ; two have been removed by death ;
and two have been excommunicated for infidelity to
the marriage covenant. One of those who died, had
been for several years a bed-ridden paralytic. He regu-
larly received from the charity fund of the church one
dollar a week, making an annuity of fifty-two dollars.
This fact exhibits the care which is taken of poor and
needy members, and the result which follows from a
regular weekly collection made up, though each may

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 37

be, of driblets. The amount of contributions, to
various purposes, is shown in the Statistical Report.

"The stated attendance upon worship is good. The
building is usually filled, and sometimes it is difficult
for a portion of the congregation to obtain seats. Dur-
ing the protracted meeting, to which allusion has been
made as having been recently held, the house was filled
to overflowing. The portion of the building appro-
priated to the coloured congregation, was wholly insuf-
ficient to accommodate them ; so that they were forced
to occupy most of the seats appropriated to the whites,
and even then there were some standing without at
the doors. Taking these circumstances into connexion
with the fact that the building itself is but ill adapted
to the purposes of the enterprize, and, in the judgment
of many, unsuitably located, it would be better if it
could be disposed of and another and more complete
edifice erected. The interests of the Church would, no
doubt, be subserved by the change.

'•The weekly Prayer-meeting, which two or three
years ago was very thinly attended, has gradually
increased in numbers, until recently the room which
has hitherto been used for the purpose, has been found
too strait, and we have been forced to alandon it and
hold the meetings in the main building. This can not
but be regarded as a favourable indication. If the
people are abundant in prayers, the Church will not
suffer.

"The attendance on the Sabbath School has been
fluctuating, and I cannot but ascribe its halting con-
dition, in great measure, to the want of a suitable
room.

"On the whole, the prospects of the Mission are
exceedingly encouraging. The tide of popular feeling,

38 The Life Work of

among the coloured people generally, seems at length
to be setting in its favour; the difficulties and embar-
rassments which have hitherto impeded its progress
appear to be gradually vanishing, and I see no reason
why they should not fully receive the Gospel, and if
the work be faithfully prosecuted, why the Church
may not, with the Divine blessing, be made a vehicle
of incalculable blessing to the coloured people of
Charleston, and become a joy and a praise in the com-
munity.

"If the Presbytery will indulge me, I will submit
some remarks touching the principle upon which the
Anson-Street enterprize has been conducted. There
have always been some who have objected to the estab-
lishment of separate Churches for the benefit of the
coloured people. Their opposition has, perhaps, in
most instances, been based on a misconception of the
nature and operation of the plan. I propose to present
a few considerations in favour of what, for convenience
sake, has been termed the 'Separate System,' and to
discuss the prominent objections which have been
urged against it.

"1. The first argument which may be mentioned in
favour of that scheme is, the accommodation of
instruction to the wants and the tastes of the coloured
people which is secured by it.

"Unless they understand the Gospel, they cannot
embrace it ; and unless they embrace it, they cannot be
saved. The question is, whether, on the ordinary plan
of our Churches, especially in cities, the Gospel is
imparted to them as fully and effectually as it may be
on the separate plan. From the nature of the case, it
cannot be. There may be some instances in which, by
extraordinary exertion, and by means of extra services,

John L. Gir^vrdeau, D. D., LL. D. 39

pastors succeed in imparting to them the Gospel in
such a manner as to be understood by them. These
cases, however, are rare. The amount of labour
required is too much for most men, and for the sort
of labour demanded, many are unsuited. To meet the
necessities of both whites and blacks, in the same ser-
vice, is ordinarily impossible. He who pleases one
class fails to please the other. If he gratifies the taste
of the whites, the blacks do not understand him; and
if he preaches so as to be comprehended by the blacks,,
the expectations of the whites are disappointed. The
'separate plan' meets and resolves this difficulty. The
minister is devoted to the instruction of the coloured
people, and there is no reason why they should not
fully receive the Gospel. Shall we retain the old plan^
at the risk of allowing the blacks to remain in com-
parative ignorance of the Gospel, or, by establishing
separate congregations, communicate it to them in all
its fullness ? The question is a vital one. The interests
of their souls are involved. Their first great w^ant is
the knowledge of the Gospel of Christ. Have it they
must, or perish in their sins. The 'separate system'
meets this urgent necessity. Unless, therefore, it can
be shown that it is exposed to fatal objections, must
we not conclude that it is the plan upon which, as
Southern Christians, we must prosecute the work of
evangelizing the coloured population?

"2. The second argument which may be alleged in
favour of the 'separate plan' is, that it is the only one
now in existence upon which the blacks can experience
the full benefit of pastoral labour.

"Besides preaching the Gospel, the other functions of
a pastor are catechizing, visiting, administering rule
and discipline, and performing marriage and funeral

40 The Life Work of

ceremonies. Now, on the ordinary plan of our
Churches, how much of the labour involved in the
discharge of these functions is overtaken? Facts
would answer, but little. The system is more to blame
than the pastor. Can a man discharge his duties to a
large white congregation, and at the same time per-
form the labour required in catechizing coloured can-
didates for Church membership as they should be,
visiting the coloured sick and poor, performing funeral
and marriage ceremonies, and, above all, investigating
and deciding the numerous and tangled cases of dis-
cipline which are ever arising? He cannot, simply
because he is human. But, are these duties to be neg-
lected? Adopt the 'separate system.' and the diffi-
culties, in a great measure, vanish. There is a division
of labour, and the work may be compassed.

"3. The third argument in support of the 'separate
plan' is, that ampler accommodation is afforded to
the coloured people in attending worship. On the old
plan, room is wanted. The space allotted to them is
insufficient. An appeal to facts would sustain this
position. Even the members of some Churches, were
they to attempt to be present at the same service,
would fail to be accommodated with seats. What
becomes of the unconverted? Are they to be excluded
from hearing the Gospel, from lack of room in our
church edifices? Adopt the 'separate system,' and
room enough is easily furnished. In view of these
facts, it becomes a serious question whether we are not
driven, by a sheer sense of duty, to the erection of sep-
arate hou5-es of worship for the coloured population.
There will always be some who will prefer to worship
with the whites. Let their wishes be gratified in that
respect; but every consideration of duty and charity

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 41

would impel us to give the Gospel to those who never
visit our white Churches, and who could not statedly
do it, if they would. It does seem to be a case in
which there is no election. We ought to do it, or essen-
tially madify our present system, so as to meet the
difficulty. Otherwise, shall we not be chargeable with
neglecting to make provision for the spiritual wants of
a large portion of our coloured population? We hesi-
tate not to institute missionary arrangements contem-
plating the benefit of destitute whites ; why not do the
same for destitute blacks?

"4. A fourth argument which may be adduced in
favour of the establishment of separate Churches for
the coloured people served hy white Ministers is, that
they prove a bar to the collection of such congrega-
tions under the supervision and control of ignorant
coloured men. The necessity, under existing circum-
stances, for separate Churches is and must be felt;
and in some Southern cities, this felt necessity has led
to the establishment of such congregations as we have
mentioned last. In these cases, good may be done, but
it is mingled with much evil. These congregations are
served very generally by uneducated men, and where
the blind lead the blind, both fall into the ditch. Let
the former plan be adopted, and the demand for the
latter will cease to exist. The Gospel will be preached
to the masses of the coloured people, and preached
with ability and wisdom.

"To the erection of separate Churches for the benefit
of the blacks, sundry objections have been raised,
which I propose briefly to consider.

"1. In the first place, it is urged that it is inexpedient
to separate masters and servants in the worship of
God; that the 'separate system' fails to sanctify their

42 The Life Work of

relation to each other ; and that it is a departure from
the spirit of the Gospel to deal with men apart from
any of the great relations of life which they sustain.

"In order to maintain this objection, two things must
be shown : first, that what is charged upon the separate
system as not done by it, is actually accomplished on
the ordinary mixed plan of our Churches; and sec-
ondly, that this is not done under the former scheme.
Now, it is absolutely necessary that we should consult
facts, and not hypotheses, in reference to this whole
question. If the actual condition of the Churches is
not the subject of discussion, then the discussion itself
is gratuitous and fruitless. Let it be observed, that it
is assumed that on the 'mixed plan,' masters and ser-
vants do worship together, and that their relation is
thus palpably brought under a sanctifying influence.
Now, if the common worship of the two classes, whites
and blacks^ be conceived to be the same thing as the
common worship of masters and servants^ then we
admit that the objection is not without some basis of
fact. It is granted, of course, that whites and blacks
worship together on the mixed plan, and consequently,
that their relation to each other as distinct social
classes, as bond and free, is affected by the influences of
that common worship. But there is more of conjec-
ture than of fact in the assumption that on the mixed
plan, masters and servants, as such, worship together.
The fact, upon examination, may appear to be other-
wise; that is, plainly, that masters and servants do
not ordinarily, particularly in cities, attend the same
services. Masters worship with other men's sei^^ants.
and servants worship with other men's masters. The
relation, in the abstract, may be affected by the com-
mon worship of the classes, bond and free, but in the

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 43

concrete, it is not alwaj^s subjected to the influence of
such common worship. This point is thus dwelt on,
because it is taken for granted that the master and
servant habitually meet in the same Church, and par-
ticipate in the same religious services. The master
looks up into the gallery and sees his servant there,
and the servant looks down and sees his master there.
Of course this is beautiful. The relation is eminently
patriarchal. A pity though it be to handle roughly so
pretty a theory, still the plain fact is, that ordinarily,
it is not so. Where a choice exists, masters and ser-
vants are very generally found in different Churches.
In support of this remark, an appeal may be taken
to experience and observation. The fact, it may be
observed incidentally, is mainly the result of that large
and unrestricted freedom in religious matters, which
is granted by masters to their servants. The prefer-
ence of most servants for other Churches than those
in which their masters worship, is not to be conceived
as resulting altogether from their wish to avoid asso-
ciation with them in worship, but partly from a love
of novelty, a passion for change, and partly from the
fact that the Churches which are popular with them,
are not always so with their masters. That we are not
altogether wrong in assigning these causes for the
preference above mentioned, is evinced by the fact that
where no choice of Churches exists, as in some parts
of the country, they attend of their own accord and in
great numbers, the Churches where their masters wor-
ship. XoAv, if there is not such a community of Avor-
ship betwixt masters and servants, as is assumed to
characterize the mixed plan, then it is obviously unfair
to regard its absence from the separate plan as a vital
defect peculiar to it. Our duty is clear to furnish the

44 The Life Work of

Gospel to the coloured people. If that can be done
most thoroughly on the separate plan, we ought not
to be deterred from doing it by an hypothesis more
beautiful than substantial. It is not intended to deny
that there is to a certain extent^ a common worship of
masters and servants on the mixed plan, but attention
is called to the fact that this is not the ordinary rule.
In the city of Charleston, for example, there are about
six thousand coloured members of the Methodist Epis-
copal Church. It may be questioned, whether one-
sixth of that number are servants of Methodist mas-
ters.

"It deserves to be remarked, moreover, that the 'sep-
arate plan' is not justly liable to the objection of sep-
arating the bond and free in the worship of God. The
plan does not contemplate the complete separation of
the coloured people from the whites. Nor does such
a separation take place in fact. With a pure separate
system, the argument has nothing to do. That is not
the separate system which is contemplated in theory,
and exists in fact. It is not fair, therefore, to attach
consequences to the plan that actually obtains, which
could only legitimately flow from another and a merely
hypothetical scheme. Now, the fact is, that whites and
blacks, bond and free, do ordinarily worship together
on the separate plan. A class-worship, as it is called,
is not produced. More than this, the sympathy
between the two classes, on this plan, is even more per-
fect than on the mixed, because the community of wor-
shi]) is more distinctly felt. They sit on the same floor,
and during the administration of the Lord's Supper,
are served at the same time. This is not generally the
case, under the operation of the mixed system. So far,
therefore, from its being the fact that the bond and

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 45

free are separated on the so-called separate plan, the
truth is, that they are brought into a closer association
and a warmer sympathy. There is the same oppor-
tunity, too, for the common worship of masters and
servants, as on the mixed plan, though not perhaps to
the same numerical extent. If it be urged that there
is a disproportion of the numbers of the whites to
those of the blacks on the separate plan, the answer is
obvious. The argument proves too much, for there is
very often an equal disproportion of blacks to whites
in our mixed Churches.

"To sum up the matter, it is perceived that the
alleged superiority of the mixed to the separate plan,
on the ground that the former secures a community
of worship between masters and servants, and tends
to sanctify their relation to each other, while the latter
does not, vanishes in a great measure under the appli-
cation of the touchstone of fact. It is seen, upon exam-
ination, that the separate system does not dissociate
the bond and the free in the solemn offices of religion,
and is not, therefore, justly liable to the objection
which has just been considered.

"If, however, it be contended that there is, on the
separate plan, an exclusive appropriation of the ser-
vices to the benefit of the coloured people, which ren-
ders it impracticable to inculcate on both classes, in
each other's presence, their relative duties, it may be
replied, that if it be a fact that both classes are gen-
erally present in the so-called separate congregations,
then there is no reason why the preacher should not
address each class whenever he judges it proper to
insist on the sj^ecific duties of masters and servants.
He is not bound. The opportunity exists, and he may

46 The Life Work of

use it, and use it as freely as in the ordinary mixed
congregations.

"The objection which has thus been considered, is not
without importance, because it proceeds on the suppo-
sition that the establishment of separate Churches for
the blacks is inconsistent with the temper of the Gos-
pel and the genius of Southern institutions. A candid
investigation of the facts in the case will, however,
remove the ground of the objection, and thus leave the
preaching of the Gospel to the blacks less hampered,
and the field of evangelical operations among them
less restricted.

"2. Another objection which has been urged against
the separate plan is, that under its operation, discipline
is administered altogether by one class to another, and
thus an invidious distinction is drawn between the
bond and the free, a distinction which the nature of
the Gospel will hardly justify.

"This difficulty is evacuated of force by the consid-
eration that the same thing, to all intents and pur-
poses, obtains in mixed Churches. In them, the power
to govern and to administer discii3line is confined
exclusively to the whites. The blacks may be the sub-
jects, they never are the dispensers of rule. Whenever,
therefore, in mixed Churches, discipline is adminis-
tered to coloured members, it is invariably exercised
by one class towards another. It makes very little dif-
ference that white members are subject to the same
exercise of discipline, and that the coloured man does
not feel oppressed by the application of a rule which
he knows to be equally extended to whites. The fact
that the white members of Churches are subject to dis-
cipline, is known to the coloured members of separate
congregations. They surely have intelligence enough

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 47

to perceive that the application of discipline is not
confined merely to themselves, and that the reason
why it does not terminate on Avhite people in their
Churches, is simply because there are no white people
there.

"In short, the animus of Southern institutions neces-
sarily pervades the Churches, whether based on the
mixed or the separate plan; and the fact that dis-
cipline is administered by one class to another in both
sorts of Churches, is but the necessary result of the
influence of civil society ujDon the constitution of the
Church.

"3. A third objection which is frequently advanced
against the establishment of separate Churches for the
coloured people is, that the poor are segregated from
the Christian congregations, and collected into isolated
communities. It is contended that this is contrary to
the genius of Christianity, which contemplates the per-
petual presence of the poor in the Churches, and that
the separation entails injury upon the white Churches,
by tending to foster pride and exclusiveness, and to
dwarf the graces of humility and love.

"This objection is grounded on a two-fold fallacy,
which a little observation will correct. It supposes,
in the first place, that none hut the foor worship in
these 'separate' congregations ; and in the second place,
that all the poor would, if the separate system were
fully adopted, be removed from the ordinary Churches.

"The first supposition is met by the fact already men-
tioned, that a pure separate Church is a figment, and
that in the so-called separate congi'egations, whites and
blacks, bond and free, rich and poor, do actually min-
gle in Divine worship. The rich and poor do meet
together, and feel their common relation to the Lord,

48 The Life Work of

the Maker of them all. The second supposition is
overthrown by the equally obvious fact, that there
are poor whites as well as poor blacks in every Church,
and that there ever will be, separate congregations to
the contrary notwithstanding, some coloured folk in
every white Church. One would suppose from the
tenor of the objection, and the manner in which it is
pressed, that the blacks are the only poor in the coun-
try, and that all white people south of Mason and
Dixon's are, of necessity, nabobs. If all the coloured
people were swept away by a plague, or, what would
be equivalent, by transportation, the Church would
have no cause to lament that all her poor had gone,
and that none remained to call out her sympathy, and
deplete her purse. It seems, too, rather strange that
the blacks should be emphatically designated as the
poor, when it is known that their wants are as well
provided for as those of half the white population,
and provided for not because they are objects of
charity, but because thej^ earn their bread by their
labour. Their security against privation is guaran-
teed by the interest in them which their masters must
feel. Let those who urge this objection inquire upon
whom the charities of the Church are mainly expended.
Surely, not so much upon the blacks as the poor whites.
If the blacks, then, are gathered into separate con-
gregations, that the Gospel may be given them in its
fullness, does that rob the Churches of their poor ? It
is clear that there is not, and cannot be, on this scheme,
a division of the Church into the two distinct and
isolated classes of rich and poor.

"4. A fourth objection to separate Churches for the
blacks is, that their constitution is ecclesiastically
irregular; that our form of government does not con-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 49

template the permanent exercise of evangelistic func-
tions in a settled community, and in the vicinity of
regularly organized Churches.

"In reference to this difficulty, which deserves consid-
eration, it may be replied that the coloured people
virtually constitute a frontier settlement. They are,
although not geographically, yet morally and intel-
lectually, the frontiers of society. The sjjint of our
constitution is not violated by imparting to them the
Gospel through the labours of an Evangelist; and as
from the nature of the case, the}^ can never pass out of
a condition of ecclesiastical minority, the necessity
which at any time exists for that sort of labour among
them, must always exist.

"The fact is, that the Southern Church is forced, by
the nature of the civil society in which she is pro-
videntially 2:)laced, to institute particular arrangements
adapted to her exigencies. They should not, however,
trench upon the constitution. She is warranted in
adopting means to give the Gospel to the blacks, which,
although not specifically provided for in the constitu-
tion, are not inconsistent with its spirit. Separate
Churches for the blacks contemplating the permanent
exercises of the functions of the Evangelist, would fall
under the operation of this principle.

"5. It only remains briefly to consider a plan by
which it is proposed to obviate the necessity for sepa-
rate congregations.

"An ingenious writer, in The Southern. Presbyterian^
is of opinion that the obstacles which hinder the thor-
ough cultivation of the coloured field may be removed
without estal)lishing separate Churches, by restricting
the growth of our ordinary mixed Churches, and thus
rendering it practicable for pastors to compass their

50 The Life Work of

duties both to whites and blacks. He contends that a
Southern Church ought not to expand beyond a cer-
tain point; that when it has reached that point, a
colony should be detailed to organize a new Church.
Now, if this were feasible, if the growth of our
Churches could, in fact, be thus arrested at a given
point, and if, in addition to this, lay labour could be
called in to an effective assistance of pastors, why then,
perhaps, as he intimates, this would be the best plan
upon which to constitute a Southern Church. The
difficulty, however, lies in the realization of this idea;
and it is a difficulty which, it may be feared, amounts
to an impossibility. The question at once arises
whether any general rule securing these results could
be established. Every one knows the reluctance of
Churches to colonize. There seems to be a natural ten-
dency in organized bodies to perpetuate themselves and
to resist all attempts to diminish their corporate
strength. Popular and attractive preaching, more-
over, combined Avith various circumstances, tends to
keep a large congregation together; and, after all, it
is very generally the case, that even a small white con-
gregation absorbs the attention of a pastor, to the com-
jDarative neglect of the coloured people.

"The consideration, however, which presses with
most weight is, that it is necessary that something be
done, and that speedily, to furnish the Gospel to the
ignorant and perishing sons of Ham. and to bring them
to the knowledge of salvation through Jesus Christ
our Lord. We can ill afford to wait until theories are
reduced to fact. Meanwhile souls are perishing, and
the 'separate system' presents a practicable means of
giving them the Gospel, and giving it to them with
some tolerable efficiency. We are not, however, so

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 51

wedded to the plan, as to refuse to accept a more excel-
lent way. If such a way can be pointed out, it will be
our duty, as well as privilege, to walk therein.

"In the remarks which have been made, it has not
been intended to express the conviction that the 'sepa-
rate plan' is absolutely the best that can be devised for
accomplishing the evangelization of the coloured peo-
ple. It may be that some such plans as that sug-
gested by the writer to whom we have alluded, or one
which would admit only a limited number of whites,
would be preferable. The question can only be deter-
mined by actual experiment. When a trial of the
different plans shall have been thoroughly made, we
may be in a better position than at present to decide
upon the best method of evangelizing the coloured peo-
ple."

Work Among the Negroes— Part II

By Joseph B. Mack, D. D.

The Rev. Dr. John LaFayette Girardeau was
remarkable as a man, and pre-eminently so as a minis-
ter.

With a body well formed, agile and vigorous, with
a mind clear, broad, patient and accurate, with emo-
tions easily touched, which, like his heart's blood, con-
tinually enlivened his whole being, and with a peculiar
spiritual experience somewhat similar to that of the
Apostle Paul ; he was, by nature and by grace, divinely
fitted for his self-sacrificing and unique work.

He was Avonderfully gifted as a fastor. So tender
and so sympathetic was he with the afflicted; so cer-
tain to say the right word at the right time and in the

52 The Life Work of

proper place that many felt, as one of his people
remarked, ''He appears to be a messenger just from
God, and bringing with him some of the atmosphere of
heaven."

He was also wonderfully gifted as a teacher. He not
only gave the pupil a view of the subject in its entirety,
but also presented every detail of importance. As one
of his students said. "When Dr. Girardeau is through
I feel that the whole ground has been covered and that
nothing more need be said."

But he was most wonderfully gifted as a preacher.
The pulpit was his throne — its prayers, a golden scep-
ter— its sermon, a jewelled crown. To preach Jesus
Christ and Him crucified was the ''one thing" of his
life, his chiefest jo}^ — and often did the tones of his
voice so reveal this highest delight of his heart as to
make the melody of his words sound as sweetly as the
echoes of the morning.

My first meeting with Dr. Girardeau was in 1860 at
the residence of Rev. Dr. John B. Adger, while I was
a student in the Columbia Theological Seminary.
Pointing to Dr. Girardeau, who Avas on the other side
of the room. Dr. Adger emphatically affirmed to sev-
eral of us, ''There is the Spurgeon of America, the
grandest preacher in all of our Southland." This
statement then seemed to me a very extravagant one,
and provoked the criticism, '^See how these South Car-
olinians love one another." But afterwards I often
realized that it was strictly and entirely true. Let me
mention three incidents in illustration.

Once in Zion (Calhoun Street) Church of Charles-
ton he was preaching to a large congregation of
negroes. As in plaintive tones he pictured Jesus Christ
going forth to death and bending beneath the burden

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 53

of the cross, every eye was opened wide and riveted
upon the speaker, while each breast seemed to rise and
fall, as step after step was taken up the rugged steep
of Calvary. When the place of execution was reached
everybody fell back and many hands were raised in
horror. AVlien the nails were driven a deep sigh swept
through the house like the sad moan of the sea as it
rolls in upon the shore, and when the Saviour's head
was drooped in death a deep shudder convulsed the
weeping throng as hundreds piteously cried, "O, my
God! O, my God!"

Again, during the summer of 1870 we were holding
a meeting in the back country of South Carolina at a
place called Whippy Swamp. It was my night to
preach, but he sat with me in the pulpit. The interest
was so intense that before the sermon was finished I
was awed into silence, as I realized my utter inability
to fully meet the eternal issues of that hour. In despair
I turned round and cried to Dr. Girardeau, "Can you
not tell these perishing sinners of our precious
Saviour?"

At once he was on his feet. In a voice tremulous
with emotion he tenderly told them of their critical,
their very critical condition because of the presence of
God's Holy Spirit, and pointed to Christ as a refuge,
an entirely safe refuge. Then his voice changed — the
subdued manner was gone — the tremulous tone disap-
peared. In accents of exultation he proclaimed a
divinely glorious Saviour. As the fires of Christian
triumph flashed from his eyes and flamed forth in his
words the hearts of all God's people were kindled with
the joy of His salvation, and tears of gratitude coursed
down every cheek.

54 The Life Work of

Just then, in a voice loud and thrilling, he cried, ''O,
sinners, dear, dying sinners, this is our Saviour. Come
to Him just as you are. Come to Him right now." In
an instant every impenitent person in the house (with
a single exception) rose up and rushed forward to the
foot of the pulpit. Some outside dashed through the
doors and one or two sprang through the windows to
reach the same place. Suddenly there came a strange
hush over the house. I expected Dr. Girardeau to lead
in prayer or make an earnest exhortation. But no !
In clear, sweet and ringing tones he began to sing the
well known hymn, "Come to Jesus." Ere the hymn
was finished there was joy in two worlds. In God's
glorious heaven angels were singing and saying, "He
has saved themy In the rude country church sinners
were singing and saying, "He hath saved m6." And to
the heart of our Lord the song of the sinners here was
sweeter than the song of the angels there.

Once again, in November, 1881, we had the semi-cen-
tennial of the Columbia Seminary, hoping thus to help
in its endowment. A large number of ministers were
present, among whom was Rev. W. A. Wood, D. D., of
Statesville, N. C, a cultured scholar and a keen critic;
he said, "I came especially to hear Dr. Girardeau and
to size him up." On Sunday, to a large congregation,
a prince of orators in our Israel preached. As we came
out of the church Dr. Wood enthusiastically said,
"magnificent, magnificent."

On Tuesday, to a comparatively small congregation.
Dr. Girardeau preached. For the first half hour, with
logic on fire, he discussed an important doctrine, and
then described its glorious effects, closing with a vivid
view of our Saviour's ascension and the descent of the
angelic hosts meeting Him with song and the chimes

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 55

of silver cymbals. As he began to close almost every
hearer was either leaning forward or else was standing
up, and as after he ceased to speak he continued to
move his hands in circles up, and up, and up, stopping
for a second at the completion of each circle, the
sweet chimes of silver cymbals in angel hands seemed
to fill the house and thrill every heart.

For over a minute all remained spellbound and
breathless, and then came the rustling sound as they
fell back into their seats like those aw^akening from a
delightful dream. No j^rayer was made, no hymn was
sung, only the benediction was pronounced, and then
in silence the strangely impressed hearers quietly
passed out of the church.

Dr. Wood, Dr. J. H. Thornwell, Jr., of Fort Mill,
and myself were together. Not a word was spoken
until nearly a square had we gone. I broke the silence
by saying, "Brother Wood, you have now heard Dr.
Girardeau, and what do you think?" Clasping his
hands together and looking upward, he replied, "It
was more than magnificent. I have never heard any-
thing to equal that. No other man can speak like that
man." Dr. Thornwell then added in a voice trembling
with emotion, "Put me down for $100.00 to the endow-
ment of the Seminary as a thank offering for the privi-
lege of hearing that sermon. It is worth ten times that
much to me in my work, but that is all I have to give."

These three instances could be made five-fold more,
but they are sufficient. Perhaps some reader may think
they are colored b}^ the partiality of a friend. Let me
then give two instances of the estimate of those who
were entire strangers to him, each of whom heard him
onlv once.

56 The Life Work of

1. When Dr. Girardeau was preaching at the Second,
now the Arsenal Hill, Presbyterian Church in Colum-
bia, S. C, the Eev. J. M. Buckley, D. D.. of the North-
ern Methodist Church, and another minister going
South, stopped over one Sunday in Columbia. Dr.
Buckley was one of the finest scholars in America ; the
editor of the New York Christum Advocate, the author
of a number of books, among which is "Extemporane-
ous Oratory," and a man who had special opportunities
for hearing the greatest orators of the world. Let me
give his estimate as told in his own paper:

"We arrived in Columbia on Saturday evening.
After being settled at the hotel we walked through the
city and were charmed with it. After a walk of two or
three miles we went into a book store to make a few
purchases. I said, 'Sir, whose church would you advise
a stranger, Avho wished to hear the best preacher, to
visit tomorrow?' Without a moment's hesitation he
answered, 'Dr. Girardeau's Mission,' and a gentleman
standing by looked acquiescence.

"Never was there a more beautiful day than Sunday,
March ITth, in Columbia. There have been days as
fine; none finer: the perfection of a spring day. It
Avould take the pen of a Thomson or a Wadsworth to
describe it Avorthily. Every window was open; the
trees were full of birds, the streets of children; the
peach and other fruit trees in blossom and many flow-
ers in bloom.

"On reaching 'Dr. Girardeau's Mission' we found
every seat occupied and some of the congregation
standing. Perceiving that we were strangers, an
usher procured chairs and placed us very near the pul-
pit. As we were about to enter, one of us said to the
other, 'We don't get the chance to hear others preach

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 57

often. I would like to hear something that would
move my soul.''

"The first thing noticed was the character of the con-
gregation. It was the most refined and intelligent con-
gregation of its number that I had ever seen in the
South — and I do not remember to have seen it sur-
passed in the North — more solid-looking gentlemen and
ladies of striking appearance. And the young people
were of the best sort. Never did I see an assembly that
looked so little like a 'mission' — not only intelligence,
but the evidence of wealth Avere apparent.

"I have now to say that, having heard Thomas Guth-
rie of Edinburgh, James Hamilton of London, and Mr.
Spurgeon six or eight times, it has never fallen to my
lot to hear a more absorbing, spiritual, eloquent and
moving sermon on an ordinary occasion. It was worthy
of William Wirt's Blind Preacher. It made all the
preaching I have ever done, and nearly all I have ever
heard seem like mere sermonizing. Looking around to
catch the eye of my friend, I saw that two-thirds of
all the men in the audience were in tears. It was no
rant or artificial excitement or mere pathos, but thought
burning and glowing. None but a man of equal intel-
lect, learning, piety and eloquence could preach such a
discourse without notes."

The second instance was told me by Eev. J. H.
McNeilly, D. D., of Nashville, Tenn., who received it
from Col. Alfred Robb himself. Colonel Robb was a
prominent lawyer in middle Tennessee, an influential
elder of the Presbyterian Church, a colonel of the
Forty-sixth Tennessee Regiment, C. S. A., and a dele-
gate to the National Democratic Convention that met
at Charleston in 1860. In the hotel on Sunday he was
accosted by Gen. Benjamin F. Butler of Massachusetts,

58 The Life Work of

who was also a delegate to the convention, who asked,
"Where are you going?" Colonel Robb replied, "To
hear a great white preacher whose life is consecrated
to the sah'ation of negi^oes.*' General Butler exclaimed,
"Well, as I have never heard of any such thing as that,
I will go with you." On entering the church they
found the negroes occupying the main floor, while the
whites were seated in the gallery.

Colonel Eobb described the scene thus : "The prayer
of the preacher was earnest, simple and humble as of a
man pleading with God. The singing was general,
heartfelt and grand. The sermon was tender and
spiritual, and though profound, was plain, delivered
with fire and unction. After the preacher took his seat,
deeply impressed. I was with closed eyes meditating
on the wonderful sermon, when I heard some one
sobbing. Looking around I saw General Butler's face
bathed in tears. Just then the church officers came for
the usual collection and at once General Butler drew
from his pockets both hands full of silver coin (put
there to tip the waiters), and cast it into the basket,
with the audible remark, 'Well, I have never heard
such a man and have never heard such a sermon.' " In
two years from that day Colonel Robb had died on the
field of battle fighting for the South, Dr. Girardeau
was a chaplain in the Confederate States Army, and
General Butler was hated by the men and women of
Dixie.

But remarkable as was the preacher, even more
remarkable, if that is possible, was his chosen field of
labor. It was not among the cultured and refined, the
educated and influential who so highly appreciated his
sermons and delighted in his eloquence ; but among the

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 59

illiterate and the ignorant to whom his scholarly ser-
mons would seemingly be like words spoken in an
unknown tongue. It was not among the Southern
whites, that people of almost pure British stock, with
whom in everything he was in full and hearty sympa-
thy, but among negro slaves whose black skins and
kinky hair were symbols of their inferiority.

Why did this man, the equal of any preacher in
America, refuse calls to New York and Philadelphia,
to Baltimore and Wilmington, to St. Louis and Louis-
ville, to Nashville and Atlanta, to Memphis and New
Orleans, where he could have been admired, renowned
and influential — why did he turn his back upon all
these prominent places, upon these best gifts that
preachers very properly covet, and consecrate his life
to work among slaves, negro slaves, and to the most
inferior of them, even to the Gullah negroes of the tide
water section of South Carolina?

1. Because of his love for South Carolina. The love
of native land is a God-given instinct implanted within
the human heart to ennoble him who was created in
the image of his Maker. Even upon the inferior races
it is divinely and indelibly stamped. The sallow
Esquimaux says that the sun shines nowhere so bright
as in his own Greenland. The brown Polynesian feels
that no land is as fair as his own Seagirt isle. The
red Indian can imagine nothing so grand as the forests
of his ow^n hunting grounds. The negro of the Caro-
lina coast esteems the fragrance of the rose and lily as
far inferior to the odor of his salt marsh.

In the ethics of the white man the love of native land
is a cardinal virtue and the lack of it a detestable vice.
Thus Walter Scott speaks of it :

60 Thf Life Work of

"Breathes there a man with soul so dead,
Who never to himself hath said,
This is my own, my native land !
Whose heart has ne'er within him burned
As home his footsteps he hath turned
From wanderings on a foreign strand !

"If such there be, go mark him well,
For him no Minstrel raptures tell.
High though his titles, proud his name,
Boundless his wealth as wish may claim ;
Despite these titles, power and pelf
The wretch concentered all in self.
Living, shall forfeit fair renown,
And, doubly dying, shall go down
To the vile earth from whence he sprung,
Unwept, unhonored and unsung."

Dr. Girardeau was born about the time when South
Carolina stood ready to assert her sovereignty and
nullify any Act of Congress that threatened her wel-
fare or her honor. Hence, as a boy, by his environ-
ment, he was impressed with the idea that the State of
South Carolina was his native land, to which his love
and loyalty was due as that of a child to the mother
who gave him birth.

This sacred affection grew with his growth, filling
every avenue of his heart and thrilling every fiber of
his whole being. When a young man, he felt that his
mother State needed the service of her sons, and so to
her he consecrated his life, resolving to live in no other
State, to labor among no other people, and to sleep,
after death, under no other soil.

Let me mention two incidents to illustrate this fact:

Just after the war he was released from a Federal
prison and was journeying in a wagon w^ith others to
his home. ^Yhen they had passed the State line some

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 61

, JL^. J^.,

one said, "We are now in South Carolina." Imme-
diately Dr. Girardeau shouted "Stop," and then leaping
out of the wagon he kneeled down and laid his head on
the ground. With streaming eyes he exclaimed, "O
South Carolina, my mother, dear, God be thanked that
I can lay my head on your bosom once more." It was a
strange scene, but characteristic of the man.

The other incident occurred when he was a profes-
sor in Columbia Seminary. The finances of the semi-
nary were in a bad condition and the directors expected
to lower the already small salaries of the professors.
The Central Church of Atlanta gave him a call, prom-
ising a salary more than double what he was receiving.
He promptly declined it. The church asked me to see
him, and so I went to see him and urged him to accept
it. He said, "I have wired them declining to accept,
and so the case is settled." I replied, "No, I will write
them and they will renew it." On my pressing him to
accept it, he rose, and after walking several times across
the room, stood in front of me and said, "I will tell you
now why I cannot accept that call, though I never
expected to tell any one. By the grace of God I was
born in this State, through the mercy of God my home
all my life has been in this State, and it is my heart's
desire and prayer that my lifeless body shall sleep
beneath its sod until the resurrection morn. South
Carolina is my mother. She now needs the service of
her sons. I would rather accept $400.00 and a cabin in
a country church of South Carolina than the $4,000.00
and the splendid manse in the magnificent city of
Atlanta."

2. The Needs of the Coast Negro. As he had conse-
crated himself to labor in his native State, he also con-
secrated himself to labor amongst the most needy class

62 The Life Work of

in that State. These were the negroes on the coast — in
the tide-water section of South Carolina.

The white 2:>eople had a plenteous supply of minis-
ters. Being descended from Christian parents, some of
whom were martyrs, and many of whom were exiles
for the cause of Christ, every impulse of their whole
being called for the presence of a house of worship and
the preaching of a man of God. Hence in every city,
town and village, and in almost every country neigh-
borhood there were regular church services for the
whites.

In the middle and up-country sections of the State
the negroes had many Christian privileges. As the
whites were comparatively numerous, they permitted
the negroes to have churches of their own in many
places. The galleries in the white churches were set
apart for the use of the negroes. The family servants
were expected to be present at family prayers in most
of the homes where the family altar was honored. In
many homes there was instruction of all the servants on
Sabbath afternoon. More than all these things, there
was daily contact with Christian whites, and as the
chameleon becomes brown when on the brown earth,
and green when on the green leaf, so the negro, whose
peculiarity is to take his character from his environ-
ment, was greatly blessed and elevated by association
with these Christian men and women.

With the negroes on the coast the conditions were far
different. The white families were comparatively few,
and many of these had summer homes where they
resided several months in the year. Hence Christian
privileges were few and very limited. On the contrary,
almost everything was against Christianity. The
negroes were more ignorant than those in the upper

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 63

part of the State. They were in masses on large plan-
tations so as to more easily preserve their heathenish
ideas and customs. Some of them were born in Africa
and venerated the religion of the dark continent.
Among them were "The Witch Doctors," or "voodoo
men," who exercised almost absolute control over many
of their people, and who had a bitter and deathless
hatred of the "white man's religion."

The prospect was very dark, and work among these
people appeared to be a "forlorn hope." But if the dif-
ficulties loomed up mountain high, the grace of God in
young Girardeau's heart, like the waters of the flood,
could and did go far above the highest mountains and
so prevailed that he freely and fully consecrated him-
self to labor among this people as the one work of his
life.

It was the same spirit of sacrifice that sent Brainard
to the savages of North America, and Paton to the can-
nibals of the New Hebrides, and Damien to the lepers
of Molokai, that sent Girardeau to the "voodoo" domi-
nated negroes of the Carolina coast.

Perhaps he also felt as Paul says of himself in
Romans 15 :20, "Yea, so have I strived to preach the
Gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build
upon another man's foundation."

3. He Himself Was a Slave Owner. The tie of affec-
tion binding many masters to their slaves was tender,
strong, and highly ennobling to both master and slave.

We love what belongs to us, often simply because it
is our own. The words "Woodman, spare that tree,
touch not a single bough," are not mere poetry. The
saying, "Love me, love my dog" is not a mere proverb,
but both are the living utterances of loving hearts.
If so in regard to possessions that are without souls.

64 The Life Work of

how much more dear to the Christian master's heart
were those possessions made in the image of his God
and endowed with immortality ?

This tie was especially strong when the master had
inherited his slaves, for then they were not only mem-
bers of his own household, but they had been members
of the household of his parents. The same feeling that
caused Abraham to circumcise not only the children of
his house, but also the servants of his household, filled
the heart of many a Christian master. Hence they were
far more deeply interested in the salvation of their ser-
vants than the Northern Christians are in the salvation
of their foreign population, for these are only their fel-
low men, and neither their peculiar property nor mem-
bers of their households.

This love of the master was heightened by the strong
and striking but not strange affection which the mass
of the negroes had for their white owners. They
regarded the white man as superior to the black man;
his white skin being God's symbol of superiority and
their black skins the seal of their inferiority. Hence
the most of them felt it to be an honor to belong to an
honored white person, and the richer and more honored
the owner, the prouder and happier the slave to call
him master.

This affection was intense in the hearts of the house-
servants. These were the nobility among the negroes,
because of their more honorable position and also
because of their superior intelligence resulting from
their environment.

The love and loyalty of the "old mammy" nurse, the
cook, the housemaid, the butler, the bod^^-servant, the
carriage driver, and the gardener, was like that of a
clansman for his chief, like that of a trusted subject for

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 65

his king. Northern men and women have often won-
dered why during the civil war the Southern wives and
children were so entirely safe at home, when their hus-
bands and their fathers were far away in the army. It
was because of this love and loyalty of the mass of the
negroes, and especially that of the house servants who
were the leaders of their race.

This love and loyalty of the master to the slave, and
of the slave to the master was beautiful — often "pass-
ing the love of women" — like that of David and Jona-
than, and would have continued to this day, as a foun-
tain of continual blessing to both races, had it not been
for the unholy alliance between the "Witch Doctors"
among the negroes and the mistaken philanthropists of
the North; who, like Pilate and Herod, becoming
friends, made possible the crucifixion of this love and
loyalty upon the cross of fratricidal strife.

The self-sacrifice of young Girardeau, the slave
owner, for the souls of the degraded negroes of the Car-
olina coast, is an imperishable testimony to the exist-
ence of this tender tie, which, though unknown to
almost all Christendom, is known to "The Christ," and
is as beauteous to His eyes "as apples of gold in a net-
work of silver."

4. The Results of the Woi'k. These were marvellous.
He won the devotion of the negroes to himself, he won
a multitude of sinful souls for Christ, he won the desire
and a determination on the part of many negroes, to
attain to higher planes in the Christian life.

(1) He completely won the hearts of the negroes to
whom he preached. They heard him reviled by some
whites as a religious crank and a bigoted fool, who was
wasting his magnificent talents and throwing away his

66 The Life Work of

life on a low, dirty and degraded lot of beings who
were only a little better than brutes.

These revilings only made him to them the more
dear, for they esteemed him a martyr, sacrificing him-
self and suffering for their sakes. Hence, in his preach-
ing they listened as to a messenger sent to them from
heaven, and in his prayers they heard their representa-
tive at God's throne of grace. Thus as he pleaded
(oftentimes with tears) with them for God and with
God for them their whole hearts flowed out in love to
him, and he became to many as dear as their own lives.

Two incidents sufficiently illustrate this. When he
left Wappetaw Church to go to Wilton he preached his
last sermon to a large congregation. The entire crowd
were convulsed with grief and the church became a
real Bochim. As he left the house on his way home the
whole congregation, weeping and wailing, followed
him for some distance. When at last they stopped,
some were with heads bowed upon the ground, and
some with outstretched arms looking heavenward, but
all were sobbing and crying out, "O Lord, O my God,
what mek our preacher lef us !"

Again. We all know that Charleston was the citadel
of "Secession," and as such, detested by the Federal
authorities and most of the people of the North. Not
a few of these yearned to see it laid in ashes and made
as desolate as Babylon or Tyre. Several times efforts
were made to secretly organize the negroes, and through
them to start fires at the same time in many parts of
the city. Special agents were employed to carry out
such designs, and more than once they almost suc-
ceeded.

After the war it became an open secret why these
well laid schemes were frustrated. Some leaders of the

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 67

negroes religiously believed that Dr. Girardeau was the
spedjl_rejDresentative of God to their_race; and his
church a holy temple in which the Almighty delighted
to dwell. They feared, and they imparted this fear to
other leaders, that if negroes burned that city so dear
to this man of God, and that church so beloved and
honored by the Lord of heaven, then the divine curse
might rest upon their race and heaven witl:thold that
"freedom" which they felt was almost within their
grasp. The self-sacrificing work of one man indirectly
but really saved "The City by the Sea."

(2) He Won a Multitude of Souls for Christ. The
accessions to his church were like the waters of a river,
a steady stream, yet there were also times when the
heavenly rain caused those waters to be more abundant
and the river to rise much higher, even occasionally to
the revival overflow.

Perhaps not one-half of those brought to Christ by
his preaching united with his church. It was a com-
mon thing for members of other denominations to hear
him, for the negroes considered it a privilege to attend
his church, and prided themselves upon taking part in
its services. But such would almost always join the
churches to which their families belonged.

It was the saintly Samuel Rutherford, the pastor of
An worth Church, who said :

"O, if one soul from Anworth
Meets me at God's right hand,
My heaven will be two heavens
In my Immannel's land."

In full sympathy with this, Dr. Girardeau felt these
saved souls would make his heaven brighter and more
glorious. Like Paul, he looked upon his converts as his

68 The Life Work of

"crown of rejoicing," and each one won for Christ
became a thread to strengthen the silken cord of love
that bound him to his arduous work.

(3) He inspired many of these converts to strive for
a higher Christian life through the transforming power
of the Holy Spirit. The success of this was clearly
seen in the spiritual tone of the prayer meeting, but
especially in the high standard of Christian character
among the membership, which was noted and fre-
quently remarked upon by members of other negro
churches, by members of the white churches, and par-
ticularly by the outside world. One cause of this was
the fact that every applicant for church membership
was put into a class, which met every week to receive
the instruction of the pastor, who taught that our
religion required three things : a distrust of self, a sim-
ple trust in Christ, and the desire and endeavor to daily
live a moral and spiritual life. Such instruction for
three or six months was often sufficient to lay a founda-
tion upon which was built a beautiful Christian char-
acter, and the pastor, in seeing this, could forget the
toil of the sower in the joy of the reaper.

5. There were four other things that riveted the four
reasons already given, which, like bands of steel, bound
this wondrous man to his earth-scorned but heaven-
blessed work:

"^ (1) Dr, Girardeau Very EmotiorMl. Now emotion
is one of the characteristics of the negro. Hence, when
in his preaching their responsive interest was like the
answer of an echo, that preaching became to him an
exhilaration, a thrilling delight. As the mother forgets
the pangs of travail in her joy over her new-born child,
so he forgot all his sacrifices and was filled with joy
exceeding great as he felt the glowing sympathy of his

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. (59

spell-bound hearers, thirsting for the water of life. He
saw before him not a dark cloud of ignorant, degraded
negroes, but a cloud crimsoned with beauty divine as it
reflected the radiance of the blood-stained cross of Cal-
vary.

"This was the secret sympathy,
The silver link, the silken tie,
Which, heart to heart, and mind to mind,
Preacher unto hearer did bind."

(2) He regarded the use of instruments in public
worship in this dispensation as unscriptural. This view
was held by Rev. Dr. R. J. Breckinridge of Danville
Seminary, by Rev. Dr. J. H. Thornwell of Columbia
Seminary, and by other eminent divines. His practice
strictly conformed to his belief. Before becoming pas-
tor of Zion Church in Charleston, and what is now
Arsenal Hill Church in Columbia, he stipulated that
there should be no instrumental music in the worship of
God's house.

Some of their members yielded to his belief in this,
but preferred to have the organ, and this want of com-
plete harmony marred the pleasure of his work among
the whites. But the "ante-bellum" negro did not need
and did not want the aid of instrumental music, for
every fiber of his being was attuned to sacred song. As
the whole congregation would sing some favorite hymn,
in tones thrilling with delight, it sometimes seemed as
if the praise of heaven was beginning here below. Then
Dr. Girardeau, standing up, would, with strong voice
and commanding form, lead the people in their praise
of God. Doubtless this privilege of unrestrained par-
ticipation in the service of song, a privilege so very
rarely enjoyed among white congregations, this stand-
ing (as it were) in the very vestibule of heaven, and

70 The Life Work of

breathing the crisp air of the celestial city, this divine
joy was one link that bound him to his work among
such people.

(3) He believed that association with the white man
was essential to the uplift of the negro. He realized
that both races were descended from the first Adam,
and that for both the second Adam had died, but he
also believed that God in His Providence had made the
negro to be the inferior; that as to climb upward, the
vine needs the trellis and the ivy the wall, so the negro
needs the white man.

Hence he always desired the negro churches to be
connected with and under the supervision of the white
churches. Hence he doubted the propriety of sending
American negroes, though well educated and even with
an admixture of white blood, as missionaries to Africa,
for he believed that when left to themselves they could
not resist the temptation to dishonesty and adultery.
Like the vine and iv}^, when deprived of its support
they woidd fall to the ground and be damaged by the
dirt.

Forty years ago I thought that Dr. Girardeau was
wrong in this opinion, but for a long time I have
realized that he was right. Several churches conduct-
ing mission work in Africa have, by sad experience,
learned the same lesson, and among these is our own
Southern Presbyterian Church, whose Executive Com-
mittee of Foreign Missions once believed that his view
was wrong and a reflection on the work of the Holy
Spirit.

(4) A peculiar gift which he used in preaching to
negroes. Perhaps no one else ever possessed such a
unique power.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D, 71

Sometimes when both races were present he would
preach a profound sermon, and there would be w^it-
nessed a strange anomaly. The minds of the cultured
whites would be strained to keep up with the train of
thought, while the negroes seemed to clearly under-
stand and fully appreciate the whole sermon. Hence
the remark was frequently made, "How can those
ignorant negroes understand such a sermon?"

Being myself much perplexed, I asked him to
explain the problem. He replied, "The negroes under-
stand my sermon as clearh^ but not as fully as you do.
I have acquired the power to put key-words in my sen-
tences, and to emphasize them both in tone and by man-
ner, and as they are vividly impressed by those words
they secure the current of my thought."

To illustrate this: He preached a sermon in which
the first part was on the vileness of sin and the cer-
tainty of its punishment. There was the phrase "Holy
God" spoken in a tone of deep humility and awe — then
"sin hateful," with a look of intense abhorrence — then
"God angry" with an expression of heartfelt indigna-
tion, and then among other words were "judge,"
"guilty," "doomed," "death," "depart," "hell," "wail-
ing," "forever," and each word or phrase so emphasized
in tone and by gesture as to stamp its meaning upon
the mind of the hearer. One could easily see how,
through such word painting, the ignorant hearer could
readily grasp the main line of truth, and without any
weakening of its power by trying also to lay hold upon
the subordinate thoughts connected with it. The negro
got enough to fill his head and heart, not too much so
as to overflow and bring confusion to his mind.

Whether this strange power was a natural gift which
he assiduously cultivated, or whether it was acquired

72 The Life Work of

by continuous toil I know not. But its possession made
him feel that God had called him to his work, and was
one reason why he turned a deaf ear to calls from so
many leading churches among the whites.

John LaFayette Girardeau was a man singularly
gifted and wondrously fitted for a peculiar work, the
effect of which was to carve upon his character the
likeness of his Lord in a lineament rarely found. That
Lord was "The Master," yet he denied Himself
heavenly glory and became a servant, the servant of
God to lost men. Our friend denied himself earthly
fame and became a servant, the servant of Jesus Christ
to the menials of the South.

That Lord saith in Revelation, 3 :21 : "To him that
overcometh will I grant to sit with Me on My throne,
even as I also overcame and am set down with my
Father in His throne."

Work Among the Negroes— Part III
By George A, Blackburn, D. D.

The death of Dr. J. B. Mack before he had finished
his account of Dr. Girardeau's work among the
negroes necessitates another section on the most
important facts connected with this important part
of his life.

Dr. Girardeau's general view of the situation and
his personal relation to it are interestingly set forth
in a letter to Dr. Mallard. He says:

"Columbia, S. C, November 10, 1890.
"Rev. Dr. Mallard.

"My Dear Brother: Your letter, and the copy of the
/S. W. Pi^eshyterian containing your first article, have
been received. I am glad of your purpose to write on

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 73

the theme proposed, and regret that I cannot afford
you any material assistance, in consequence of having
neglected to keep a diary of experience in the work
among the slaves.

"I send you a few documents which may possibly be
of some service to you, which I beg that you will
return to me at your convenience. You may glean
something from them.

"Let me jot down some statements which may be of
interest.

"1. Previously to the war the coast of South Carolina
was covered by a net-work of Missions among the
slaves, conducted by the Methodist Episcopal Church,
South. These Missions were not the same as the Cir-
cuits, nor were they embraced in them, but were served
by separate ministers devoted to them. They were
mainly supported hy the planters. Besides preaching,
the functions of the Missionaries included catechizing
of the children and visiting of the sick on plantations.
It was a great work.

"2. The pastors of the Presbyterian Church regularly
preached to the colored people, large numbers of whom
were members of their churches. In addition to this,
some of them preached regularly on plantations, cate-
chized the negro children and youth, and visited the
sick. This was also a great work.

"3. The ministers of other evangelical denominations
partook in similar labors. In the country along the
Santee River, the Rev. Alexander Glennie, an Episco-
pal clergyman, devoted special attention to the
religious instruction of the negroes.

"4. In cases in which families or members of families
were pious, great attention was bestowed on the

74 The Life Work of

instruction of the slaves, especially the children. Sab-
bath Schools on plantations were maintained.

"5. A separate enterj^rise, in 1848, was begun for the
more thorough-going evangelization of the colored
people in Charleston under the auspices of the Rev.
John B. Adger, D. D., and the session of the Second
Presbyterian Church. A brick house of worship was
built at a cost of $7,500. In 1859, in consequence of
the enormous growth of the congregation, another
church building, which cost $25,000, contributed hy the
citizens of Charleston^ was dedicated. This house was
100 feet long by 80 feet broad, and was on a basement
divided into two rooms, Avhich afforded ample cor-
veniences for prayer meetings, catechizing of classes,
and personal instruction of candidates for membership.
From the first the great building was filled, the blacks
occupying the most of the main floor, and whites the
galleries, which seated 250 persons.

"The enterprise began as a branch congregation of
the Second Presbyterian Church; then became a mis-
sionary church under the care of Rev. J. L. Girardeau,
evangelist of Charleston Presbytery: and finally, in
consequence of the admission of white members, a
regular church with a white session.

"The close of the war found it with exactly 500
colored members and nearly 100 white. Such was its
growth from organization as missionary church in
1857, with only 48 colored members.

"I hardly know how to communicate personal
reminiscences. They would be too numerous and
detailed. Perhaps I had better not enter into the
edge of the forest. But I adventure a few which may
be of some use to you. If not, throw them out. Of
course, you do not expect to mention my name.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 75

"I remember that before I became a preacher I used
to hold meetings on my father's plantation, the cotton
house affording a convenient place of assemblage.
Previously the plantation resounded with the sounds
of jollity, the merry strains of the fiddle, the measured
beat of the 'quaw-sticks,' and the rythmical shuffling
and pattering of feet in the Ethiopian jig. Now the
fiddle and the quaw-sticks w^ere abandoned, and the
light, carnal song gave way to psalms and hymns. The
congregations were numerous and attentive, and a
genuine revival of religion seemed to obtain. I can
never forget wdth w^hat enthusiasm they used to sing
their own improvised 'spiritual':

'My brother, you promised Jesus,
My brother, you promised Jesus,
My brother, you promised Jesus
To either fight or die.

'O, I wish I was there,

To wear my starry crown.'
Oh, I wish I was there. Lord,
To wear my starry crown."

"On another plantation which I was in the habit of
visiting, a prayer meeting was commenced by one or
two young men, which became more and more solemn,
until the religious interest grew intense, and a power-
ful revival took place which involved the white family
and their neighbors. The results of that meeting were
marked, and some of its fruits remain to this day.
If ever I witnessed an outpouring of the Spirit, I did
then.

"While teaching school in another place it was my
custom to visit plantations, in rotation, on certain
afternoons of the week, and catechize and exhort the

76 The Life Work of

slaves. I knew of but one planter in that community
who objected to this practice, and he was a very irre-
ligious man. On Sabbaths, after the regular services
of the sanctuary had been held, and the white con-
gregation had dispersed, the negroes would crowd the
church building, and standing on the pulpit steps, I
would address them. Their feelings sometimes were
irrepressible. This was with the sanction of the min-
ister and elders.

"While at the Theological Seminary, I only refrained
from going on a foreign mission, because I felt it to
be my duty to preach to the mass of slaves on the sea-
board of South Carolina. Having rejected, after
licensure, a call to a large and important church which
had very few negroes connected with it, I accepted an
invitation to preach temporarily to a small church
which was surrounded by a dense body of slaves. The
scenes on Sabbath were affecting. The negroes came
in crowds from two parishes. Often have I seen (a
sight, I reckon, not often witnessed) groups of them
"double-quicking" in the roads, in order to reach the
church in time — trotting to church ! The white ser-
vice, as many negroes as could attending, being over,
the slaves would pour in and throng the seats vacated
by their masters — yes, cram the building up to the
pulpit. I have seen them rock to and fro, under the
influence of their feelings, like a wood in a storm.
What singing! What hearty hand-shakings after the
service ! I have had my finger joints stripped of the
scarf-skin in consequence of them. Upon leaving the
church after the last, mournful service with them, and
going to my vehicle, which was some hundred yards
distant, a poor little native African woman followed

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 77

me weeping and crying out. 'O, Massa, you goin' to
leave us? O, Massa, for Jesus' sake, don't leave us!'
I had made an engagement with another church, or the
poor little African's plea might have prevailed. When
next I visited that people, I asked after my little
African friend. 'She crossed over, sir,' was the ansAver.
May we meet where parting will be no more, the song
to Jesus never cease !

"The church to which I next went was in a different
part of the seaboard of South Carolina. In connec-
tion with it I was ordained, and here my work began
in earnest. The congregation included some of the
most cultivated gentlemen of the State. They were
cordially in favor of the religious instruction of their
slaves. The Avork among them consisted of preaching
to them on Sabbath noons in the church building in
which their masters had just worshipped, preaching to
them again in the afternoons on the plantations, and
preaching at night to mixed congregations of whites
and blacks. This in the summer. In the winter, I
preached at nights on plantations, often reaching home
after midnight. Many a time have I seen the slaves
gathered in their masters' piazzas for worship, and
when it was very cold in their dining rooms and their
sitting rooms. The family and the servants would
worship together. This was common, and the fact
deserves to be signalized. In order the better to com-
pass the work, I selected four points in the congrega-
tional territory, the diameter of which was about
twenty miles in one direction, and purposed to secure
the erection of meeting houses, which would each be
central to several plantations, in order to economize
labor and bring the Gospel more frequently in con-

78 The Life Work of

tact with the people by preaching regularly once a
month, on Sabbaths, at those points. This plan was
prevented of accomplishment by my removal to the
missionary work in Charleston. It is curious that
after the war the colored people erected houses of wor-
ship at those very j^oints. My last service with the
negroes at this church I will never forget. The final
words had been spoken to the white congregation, and
they had retired. While a tempest of emotion was
shaking me behind the desk, the tramp of a great mul-
titude was heard as the negroes poured into the build-
ing, and occupied all available space up to the little
old wine-glass shaped pulpit. When approaching the
conclusion of the sermon, I turned to the unconverted,
asked what I should say to thern^ and called on them
to come to Jesus. At this moment the great mass of
the congregation simultaneously broke down, dropped
their heads to their knees, and uttered a wail which
seemed to prelude the judgment. Poor people ! They
had deeply appreciated the preaching of the Gospel to
them.

"Into the details of the work in Charleston I cannot
enter. They would occupy too much space. It lasted
(with me) from 1854 to 1862. I have sometimes
thought that I devoted too much time to it. I was
absorbed in it. But the labor was not in vain, I trust.
Besides Sabbath preaching, most of the nights in the
week were spent at the church in the discharge of
various duties — holding prayer meetings, catechizing
classes, administering discipline, settling difficulties,
and performing marriage ceremonies. Often have I
sat for over an hour in a cold room instructing individ-
ual inquirers and candidates for membership; often
have I risen in the night to visit the sick and dying or

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 79

to administer baptism to ill children. I made it a
duty to attend all their funerals and conduct them.
Just two extreme instances of dying experience I will
give. One was that of a servant of a distinguished
judge. He was dying. As I entered his room, he
rubbed his hands together, chuckled with a hilarious
delight like that of a boy going home on Christmas
Eve, and exclaimed, 'I'm going home! Oh, how glad
I am!' So he passed away.

"Another was that of my own servant. He was
reared by me; was a bad boy; when he grew up,
attended my church; professed conversion, and Avas
seized not long after with galloping consumption. He
was in terror. His sins filled him with dismay. I
labored with him, but he refused to be comforted. At
last, not long before his departure, the light of God's
reconciled countenance broke upon the midnight of
his soul. From that time he had perfect peace, and
breathed his last, I firmly believe, on the bosom of his
Saviour. Freely did my tears flow while I was utter-
ing the last words of prayer and exhortation over his
encofRned body. His mother, also my servant, died
after him, during the war when I was absent in Vir-
ginia. She kept calling for me till she expired. Tell
me that there was no true, deep affection of masters to
slaves and slaves to masters ! It was often like that
between near relatives.

"The most glorious work of grace I ever felt or wit-
nessed was one which occurred in 1858, in connection
with this missionary work in Charleston. It began
with a remarkable exhibition of the Spirit's super-
natural power. For eight weeks, night after night,
save Saturday nights, I preached to dense and deeply

80 The Life Work of

moved congregations. The result I have given in the
general statement prefixed.

"The work steadily and rapidly grew until it was
arrested by the war. I could give you some incidents
that would be interesting, but time will not permit.
One I mention in which the ludicrous and the pathetic
were blended, and the saying was fulfilled, that the
fountains of laughter and tears are next to each other.
After a session had been formed, there came before
it for admission into the church a small native African,
whose name was Cud jo. The following colloquy
occurred between the minister and the candidate:
'Cudjo, you want to join the church?' 'Yessy, Massa.'
'Cudjo. you trust in Jesus?' 'Yessy, Massa.' 'Cudjo,
you love Jesus?' 'Oh, yess3^ Massa; me lub Jesus.'
'Cudjo, you expect to see Jesus?' 'Oh, yessy, Massa;
me 'spec to see Jesus.' 'When he sees you coming,
what do you think Jesus will say?' ' Wat he say? He
say, Cudjo, you come? I say, Yessy, Ma'am, I come.^
Here he struck his hands together, and the session
laughed and cried at the same time.

'*The conduct of this church after the war justified
the wisdom of those who projected it. They clung
to the white people. One of the first invitations, in
writing, which I received upon my return from
imprisonment at Johnson's Island, and while yet in
the interior of the State where my family were refu-
gees, in July, 1865, to resume labor, was from this
colored membership, entreating me to come back and
preach to them as of old. For years they declined to
separate themselves from the Southern Presbyterian
Church, and even after its Assembly had, in 1874,
recommended an organic separation of the whites and
blacks, they continued to maintain an independent

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 81

position. Only at a late date did they resolve to con-
nect themselves with the Northern Presbyterian
Church."

"John L. Girardeau."

The authority for the organization of the Church, its
covenant, and the original signers constitute a most
interesting document. It is as follows :

^'' Whereas^ The Charleston Presbytery, meeting at
Columbia, S. C, did, on the thirty-first day of March,
in the year eighteen hundred and fifty-five, separate
the congregation of coloured people worshipping in
the building, known as the Anson Street Church, from
the Second Presbyterian Church, and did place it, with
forty-eight coloured persons consenting to be members
of it, under the care of Rev. J. L. Girardeau, to gov-
ern the said Church and to be responsible for the
same directly to the Presbytery, with the aid of an
advisory committee acting with him, consisting of
ruling elders appointed by Presbytery from the several
churches of the city (see printed minutes of Presby-
tery for March, 1855, page 12), and

^^Whereas^ the said Presbytery meeting at James

Island did, on the day of April, in the year

eighteen hundred and fifty-eight, adopt the following
minute and resolution, viz : 'In consideration of the
application now made by sundry white persons to join
the Anson Street Church, and the statements of the
Rev. John L. Girardeau, Rev. Dr. Adger, and others,

" ^Be it resolved^ That this Presbytery does now
reaffirm its resolution adopted in 1854, authorizing
the present committee of elders, together with Rev.
Mr. Girardeau, as a Committee of Presbytery, to
receive these and any other white members in the

82 The Life Work of

usual regular way, with a view to organize a church
with its white members, elders, and coloured members:'
and,

'^Whereas, in accordance Avith the above resolution
of the Presbytery, we, the subscribers hereunto, have
been received into the communion of the said Mission-
ary Church, with a view to organize a regularly con-
stituted Church, henceforth to be known as Zion Pres-
byterian Church. Now. therefore, we do, by our
signatures to this covenant, agree to walk together in
a church relation, as disciples of Jesus Christ, on the
principles of the Confession of Faith and Form of
Government of the Presbyterian Church of the United
States of America, commending ourselves, our chil-
dren, and our servants, to the mercy and grace of
God in Christ as our only hope and confidence, whether
as individuals, or as a church; and,

'^ Whereas, the case of this Church is altogether pecu-
liar, and the opinion exists that there is a possibility
that the missionary feature of the Church, contem-
plating chiefly the religious culture of the coloured
people, may, in the course of time, be destroyed in con-
sequence of the expansion of the white membership
and the possible exorbitancy of its demands, we do
add to the above covenant the following Declaration
and Agreement, by which we are willing to be bound,
so long as we continue members of this Church,
namely: We declare that we enter this Church, as
white members of the same, with the fullest under-
standing that its primary design and chief purpose is
to benefit the coloured and especially the slave popu-
lation of this city, and that the white membership is
a feature added to the original organization for the
purpose of better securing the ends of that organiza-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 83

tion. We declare, further, that we have chosen to
attach ourselves to this Church, not only for the bene-
fit of ourselves and our families, which we believe Avill,
with God's blessing, be secured by such a connection,
but also that we may assist by our means and our per-
sonal efforts in the support and prosecution of this
missionary work, regarding this field of labour as one
that has peculiar claims upon us. Furthermore, in
accordance with the above declaration, we do hereby
agree that the pastor of this church is to be selected
always with a view to his suitableness for labouring
most profitably among the coloured people, and that
for all time the services and labours of the minister
shall ordinarily be so divided as to apportion the reg-
ular morning service to the whites especially, and the
remaining regular service or services to the blacks
especially; and we do further agree that the coloured
people shall always be allowed to occupy, in these ser-
vices designed peculiarly for their benefit, the main
floor of the building, excepting such seats on the right
and left of the pulpit as may be appropriated to the
whites. . . . Moreover, in order to secure the perpetua-
tion of the aforesaid missionary feature in the organ-
ization of this Church, we do severally agree that, in
event of our dissatisfaction with the order of things
for which this declaration and agreement provides, we
will rather withdraw from connection with the Church
than attempt, by any influence on our part, to divert
it from its original purpose as a church contemplating
chiefly the benefit of the coloured population. — And,
finally, we do agree, with one accord, to adopt it as an
essential and unalterable rule of this particular church,
that no one shall be admitted into its white member-

84

The Life Work of

ship who is not cordially willing to sign the above
Covenant, Declaration and Agreement.

"In Avitness whereof we append our signatures : —

"Charleston, June 13th, 1858.

"John L. Girardeau,

Minister ;
Edward C. Jones,
A. Campbell,
Eobt. Adger,
F. D. Fanning,
Fleming Arnold,
J. Ellison Adger,

0. A. Bowen,

T. C. H. Dukes,
Fredk. Fanning,
Fleetwood Lanneau, Sr..

1. H. Dickinson,
F. S. Averill,

I. H. Averill,
Sparkman R. Scriven,
M. I. Jones,

E. F. Fanning,
M. F. Gillespie,
Jane E. Adger,
Clara W. Adger,
Sarah E. Adger,
Jane E. Adger,
M. Anne Adger,
Susan C. Adger,
R. A. Lanneau,
Sarah P. Girardeau,
Mary Dewees,
Susan M. Dowell,
Anna M. Small,
Susan D. Lee,
M. Addie Chambers,
Mary I. Cotchett,
Louisa M. Kent."

The colored members were governed by a constitu-
tion prepared for them by Dr. Girardeau.

RULES FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE COLOURED
MEMBERS OF ZION PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.

Government.
D enomination.

Rule 1. This Church shall be governed in accord-
ance with the Constitution of the Old School Presby-
terian Church in the United States.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 85

Officers.

Rule 2. Its officers shall be only those which the
Constitution of the Presbyterian Church recognizes,
namely — a pastor, ruling elders and deacons.

The Pastor.
Peculiar Functions.

Rule 1. To preach the Gospel, to administer the
Sacraments and to pronounce the Apostolic Benedic-
tion shall be considered functions of the ministerial
office alone.

The Session.
Potver to Govern.

Rule 1. The power to govern this Church is lodged
in the Session, which consists of the pastor and the
other ruling elders; and no authority from within the
Church shall be considered binding on the members
thereof, except that of the Session.

Admission to Memhership.

Rule 2. No person shall be admitted into the mem-
bership of the Church, except upon examination or
approval by the Session.

Removal from Memhership.

Rule 3, No person shall be removed from the mem-
bership of the Church except by the action of the Ses-
sion.

Discipline.

Rule 4. All cases of members requiring the exercise
of discipline shall be tried and decided by the Session
in conformity with the Book of Discipline of the Pres-
byterian Church.

86 The Life Work of

Departrnents of O operations.

Rule 5. The Session shall distribute the operations
of the Church into departments, each of which shall
be assigned by it to the superintendence of some officer
or officers of the Church who shall be responsible to
the Session; and who shall make regular quarterly
reports to that body touching the departments com-
mitted to their care.
Appointment of Workers.

Rule 6. The persons engaged in the several branches
of the work of the Church shall be appointed by the
Session, and shall be responsible to it.

Deacons.
Duties.

Rule 1. It is the duty of the deacons to take care of
the poor and the needy members of the Church; and
to attend to the collection and disbursement of all
moneys for charitable purposes.

Rule 2. Applications in behalf of the sick shall be
made to the deacon or deacons who shall be charged
with the disbursement of the collections for the sick.

Rule 3. Applications in behalf of the poor and
infirm shall be made to the deacon or deacons who shall
be charged with the disbursement of the collections for
the poor and infirm.

Membership.
Applications.

Rule 1. Applications for membership shall be made
at the weekly candidates' meeting.
Roll.

Rule 2. A roll of members regularly posted up for
the use of the Session shall be kept b}^ one of the elders
designated for that purpose.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 87

Classes.

Rule 3. The members shall be distributed into
divisions called classes; the distribution to be made by
the Session,

Rule 4. The candidates, as they are admitted into
the Church, shall be assigned to the several classes by
a committee of Session appointed for that purpose ; to
be called the Committee on Classes.

Rule 5. The number of regular members in each
class shall not exceed fifty ; but when this number shall
have been reached, new members may temporarily be
received into connection with it, until their number
shall be sufficient to warrant, in the judgment of the
Session, their being set off as a separate class; provided,
always, that these new members shall be so set off when
they reach the number of fifty.

Rule 6. No member shall be transferred from one
class to another except by the authority of the Session's
Committee on Classes.

Rule 7. The objects of the class meetings are — to
promote mutual acquaintance and brotherly love
among the members; to apprise them of one another's
sickness and need; to acquaint the leaders with the
same ; and to further the growth of the members in
Christian knowledge and experimental religion.

The Sick.

Rule 8. A collection shall regularly be taken up in
behalf of the sick members of the Church at the weekly
prayer meeting on Monday night.

Rule 9. Applications for aid in behalf of sick mem-
bers of the Church shall be regularly made by the
leaders to whose classes they belong at the close of the
weekly prayer meeting on Monday night.

88 The Life Work of

EuLE 10. A weekly stiiDend of fifty cents shall be
appropriated to the sick members during the time of
their sickness, for the deliver}^ of which the leaders to
whose classes they belong shall be responsible.

Rule 11. Ordinarily, sickness must be of at least a
week's duration to entitle to aid ; but in cases of urgent
need, this rule may be dispensed with, at the discretion
of the deacons, upon the representation of the leaders.

Rule 12. In doubtful cases requiring investigation
a committee of leaders may be appointed for that pur-
pose by the deacons, who shall receive the report of the
committee and pass upon the merits of such cases.

The Poor and Infirm.

Rule 13. There shall be a special fund for the pur-
pose of affording relief to the poor and infirm members
of the Church, and at their death (if destitute) of pro-
viding for their funeral and burial expenses.

Rule 14. A collection for the benefit of the poor
and infirm shall be taken up at each communion service.

Rule 15. The deacons shall be judges of the fitness
of applicants to receive aid from the fund, and of the
amount of aid to be appropriated in each particular
case.

Rule 16. In doubtful cases requiring investigation
a committee of leaders shall be appointed for that pur-
pose by the deacons, who shall receive the report of the
committee and pass upon the merits of such cases.

Attendance,

Rule 17. The members shall regularly attend the
services of the Church, except when domestic duties
prevent; protracted absence from the same without
sufficient excuse shall be considered a just cause for the
exercise of discipline.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 89

Baptism of Infants.

Rule 18. Parents shall report the births of their
children as early as possible to the leaders of the classes
to which they belong; and shall, if possible, present
their children for baptism Avithin four months after
their birth.

Meetings and Services.

Outside Meetings.

Rule 1. The Church hereby declares that she will
not be responsible for any meetings held outside the
church building; and in case the name or authority of
the Church, or of the pastor or officers thereof, is used
in behalf of such meetings by those who hold them, the
parties so doing shall be subject to the discipline of the
Church.

Stated Meetings.

Rule 2. The stated meetings of the Church shall be
as follows:

A prayer meeting on Sabbath morning, in winter,
beginning at 7 o'clock and closing at 8 o'clock; and in
summer, beginning at 6 o'clock and closing at 7 o'clock.

A forenoon meeting on Sabbath for public worship
and preaching, beginning at half-past 10 o'clock and
closing by 12 o'clock, all the year round.

An afternoon meeting on Sabbath, for public worship
and preaching, in winter beginning at half-past 3
o'clock, and closing by 5 o'clock, and in summer begin-
ning at half -past 4 o'clock and closing by 6 o'clock.

A prayer meeting on Monday night, in winter begin-
ning at 7 o'clock and closing by half-past 8 o'clock, and
in summer beginning at 8 o'clock and closing by half-
past 9 o'clock.

90 The Life Work of

A meeting for the instruction of inquirers and can-
didates for membership, on Tuesday night, in \Yinter
beginning at 7 o'clock and closing by half-past 8
o'clock, and in summer beginning at 8 o'clock and
closing by half-past 9 o'clock.

A meeting of the classes on Wednesday night, m win-
ter beginning at 7 o'clock and closing by half-past 8
o'clock, and in summer beginning at 8 o'clock and
closing by half-past 9 o'clock.

A meeting of the leaders in connection with the Ses-
sion's Committee on Classes, once a fortnight on Friday
night.

Rule 3. The expediency of holding any other than
the stated meetings shall be determined by the Session.

Mode of Conduct'mg Meetings.

Rule 4. No meeting shall be held without the
presence of responsible white persons approved by the
Session.

Rule 5. Every meeting shall be presided over by
one or more of the officers of the Church, or by some
wdiite member or members of the Church approved by
the Session.

Seating of Congregation.

Rule 6. The j^erson who first occupies a seat shall
be entitled to hold the same; except in the case of the
leaders and singers for whom particular seats shall be
reserved; and in the case of aged and infirm persons,
who shall upon application be entitled to occupy par-
ticular seats.

Rule 7. Ordinarily males and females shall occupy
separate seats.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 91

Rule 8. A white superintendent and persons under
his direction shall be appointed by the Session who
shall be charged with the seating of the congregation
and the maintenance of order. Cases of difficulty which
cannot otherwise be adjusted shall be immediately
referred to the superintendent, who shall proceed to
rectify them.

Rule 9. The Sacrament of Baptism shall be admin-
istered to adults on the Communion Sabbath on which
they make a public profession of their faith.

Rule 10. The Sacrament of Baptism shall be
statedly administered to infants on the afternoon of
the Sabbath next after the Communion Sabbath, at
which time parents who have children to be baptized
are expected to present them.

Rule 11. The names of the children to be baptized
shall be reported to the Session before the ordinance is
administered.

Rule 12. Only parents shall present their children
for baptism ; or in case of the death of the parents, only
those w^io stand to the children in the relation of
parents.

Rule 13. In accordance with the principles of the
Presbyterian Church no child will be baptized, except
one of the parents be a member of an evangelical
church.

Rule 14. The baptism of adults and of infants shall
be administered at the Church, except in extraordinary
cases of which the Session shall be the judge.

The LorcVs Swpper.

Rule 15. The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper shall
be statedly administered once a quarter, namely — on

92 The Life Work of

the afternoon of the first Sabbath in March, June, Sep-
tember and December.

Rule 16. Xo candidates for Church membership
shall partake of the Lord's Supper until they shall have
been admitted by the Session into the communion of
the Church.

Rule 17. Persons, who were not ba^^tized in infancy,
shall not partake of the Lord's Supper until they shall
have been baptized as adults.

Rule 18. The Lord's Supper shall be administered
only at the Church, except in extraordinary cases of
which the Session shall be the judge.

Funerals.

Rule 19. Funeral services shall be conducted by the
pastor or by persons appointed by the Session.

Leaders.
Appointment.

Rule 1. The leaders shall be appointed by the Ses-
sion, and continued in service at the discretion of that
body.

Charges.

Rule 2. Each leader shall have charge of one of the
classes, for the good order of which he shall be responsi-
ble to the Session.

Duties.

Rule 3. It shall be the duty of the leaders to meet
with their classes weekly at the Church; to visit and
look after the members; to assist in taking care of the
sick and needy; and to superintend the burial of the
dead.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 93

Rule 4. It shall be the duty of the leaders to report
the cases of sickness and want which require aid; and
also those which call for the attention of the pastor.

EuLE 5. It shall be their duty to report all cases
which appear to require the exercise of discipline.

Rule 6. It shall be their duty to summon parties for
trial or examination by the Session, according to the
direction of that body.

Rule 7. It shall be their duty to examine into all
applications for marriage, and to report thereon to the
pastor.

Rule 8. It shall be their duty — as it is their priv-
ilege— to set a good example to the members by
punctual attendance upon the services of the Church.

Rule 9. Only those leaders shall be exhorters and
shall be entitled to conduct funeral services, who have
been appointed by the Session.

Assistants.

Rule 10. Assistants to the leaders shall be appointed
by the Session and continued in service at the discretion
of that body.

Rule 11. It shall be the duty of the assistants to aid
the leaders in looking after the members; in visiting
the sick and needy ; and in burying the dead.

Rule 12. The appointment of assistants shall not
be considered as giving them any necessary claim to
be future leaders; and the Session shall decide upon
their fitness or unfitness, after trial as assistants, to be
promoted to the leadership.

Leaders'' Meeting.

Rule 13. The leaders' meetings shall always be pre-
sided over by the Session's Committee on Classes; and

94 The Life Work of

none shall be held without the presence of that com-
mittee.

Rule 14. At these meetings, the leaders shall pre-
sent a report of the condition of their classes; and all
cases of difficulty not requiring the intervention of Ses-
sion shall be adjusted.

Rule 15. One member of the Session's Committee
on Classes shall be considered a quorum competent to
the transaction of business at the leaders' meeting,
except in very important and difficult cases.

Rule 16. The assistant leaders shall be expected to
attend the leaders' meetings, except when in the judg-
ment of the committee on classes their presence shall
be deemed inexpedient.

Candidates'^ Leader.

Rule 17. The candidates shall be placed under the
care of a leader to be called the candidates' leader, who
shall not be connected with any of the members' classes;
and he shall have an assistant or assistants who shall be
appointed by the Session.

Duties.

Rule 18. It shall be the duty of the candidates'
leader to be present at the candidates' meetings; to
look after and visit them ; to examine into the character
and conduct of all applicants for membership ; and to
report upon all these matters to the Session's Com-
mittee on Candidates.

Instruction.
Superintendence of Insti^ction.

Rule 1. Instruction shall always be imparted by or
under the immediate supervision of one or more of the
officers of the Church designated by the Session and

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 95

responsible to it. In the absence of the officers this
duty may devolve on white members of the Church
appointed by the Session and responsible to it.

Matter of Instimction.

Rule 2. Nothing shall be taught which is not in
strict accordance with the Bible and the Standards of
the Presbyterian Church.

Form of Instruction.

Rule 3. The form of instruction shall be oral.

Parities to he Instructed.

Rule 4. The members of the Church shall be cate-
chetically instructed once a week when assembled as
classes.

Rule 5. Candidates for Church membership shall
be catechetically instructed as a class once a week by a
member of Session ; and at the same time they shall be
individually conversed with and examined by the pas-
tor touching their experience and qualifications for
admission into the Church.

Rule 6. Bible classes of advanced children, and of
adults, shall be instructed by the white members of the
Church immediately after the afternoon service on the
Sabbath.

Rule 7. The children shall be catechetically
instructed on the afternoon of every Sabbath, except
those on which the Lord's Supper is administered.

Rule 8. A class of young men shall be regularly
instructed with a view chiefly to the appointment of
leaders, as they may be required by the wants of the
Church. This class may include the leaders and assis-
tant leaders.

9e The Life Work of

Marriages.
Application to Leader.

Rule 1. Parties wishing to be married shall first
apply to a leader of this Church in order that an oppor-
tunity may be afforded for an investigation of their
case, and a report thereupon to the pastor.

Second Mamages.

Rule 2. Members of the Church purposing to marry
a second time, except in the case of the death of a
former husband or wife, shall first secure the consent
of the Session to such second marriage.

PRIXCIPLES AXD METHODS OF CHURCH
WORK.

The principles and methods of church work were
thoroughly modern, and explain in a measure the won-
derful efficiency of the church. They are as follows:

"Principles and Methods of Church Work.

"Paper Submitted by J. L. G. to Session of Zion Church, Glebe

Street, Charleston, and Adopted by It.

"1. The church as the body of which Christ is the
living Head, and the Holy Spirit the informing life,
is itself a living organism, every particular member of
which is intended to discharge a vital function.

"2. As such a living organism the church is compe-
tent to do every work which Christ, its Head, has
designed it to accomplish ; and as, from its very nature,
it is a society which was constituted for the purpose of
discharging missionary, benevolent and charitable
offices, every member of the church is by virtue of his
relation to it a member of a missionarv, benevolent and

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 97

charitable society, and is both obliged and privileged
to perform the duties which grow out of that relation.

"3. What cannot be done by individuals ought to be
done by an association of individuals. The principle
of combination ought to be recognized and employed
by the church for the prosecution of the work which
the Master has assigned her. Each particular combi-
nation of members will be but a committee of the whole
society. It will be the church acting through a com-
mittee.

"4. The principle of division of labour ought to be
employed. Different combinations or committees of
the members of the church may have distinct spheres
of labour assigned them in accordance with their gifts,
or elected by themselves as their abilities, opportunities
and wishes may lead them.

"5. The principle of thorough-going responsibility
should be invoked in connexion with the others in
order to the complete and regulated employment of
the working energies of a church. Each association or
committee of members ought to be responsible to the
session as the Divinely appointed rulers of the con-
gregation, to act under their advice, and to present to
them, at stated intervals, reports of its operations.

"The following resolutions are submitted for the con-
sideration of the Session:

" '1. That an effort be made to put these principles
into practical operation in this church.

" '2. That for this purpose, meetings of the male and
female members of the church be separately called;
that the subject be laid before them; and that they be
requested to take part in the endeavour to reduce these
principles to practice.

98 The Life Work of

" '3. That the female members of the church be
requested to form the following associations or com-
mittees: 1. Circles of i^rayer. 2. A sewing circle. 3.
A missionary committee. 4. A visiting committee.

" '4. That the male members of the church be
requested to form the following committees : 1. A mis-
sionary committee. 2. A committee on the sick.

" '5. That upon the agreement of the members to act
upon these committees, said committees be formally
appointed or at least endorsed by the Session.

" '6. That each of these committees shall periodically
submit reports of its operations to the Session, except-
ing the circles of prayer.' "

Dr. Girardeau preached habitually to from 1,500 to
2,000 people, yet his membership was never what
would be called large. Here is his own statement of
membership :
"Dec. 1860.

Coloured Members. 462

White " 62

Total " 524

460 — Total coloured communi-
cants Apr. 1861.

"At the close of the war (1865) the number of col-
oured members was precisely 500. In January, 1876,
when a call was made for those who wished to be
re-enrolled, 116 responded. Subsequently the number
of coloured members swelled to over 450, when the
General Assembly adopted the policy of separation
between the races, and I retired from the work. The

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 99

church afterwards ran down. Now, 1884, it seems to
look up a little."

The greatest event in his ministry was the revival
in the later fifties. This began with a prayer meeting
that constantly increased until the house was filled.
Some of the officers of the church wanted him to com-
mence preaching services, but he steadily refused, wait-
ing for the outpouring of the Spirit. His view was
that the Father had given to Jesus, as the King and
Head of the church, the gift of the Holy Spirit, and
that Jesus in His sovereign administration of the
affairs of his church, bestowed him upon whomsoever
He pleased, and in whatever measure He pleased. Day
after day he, therefore, kept his prayer addressed
directly to the mediatorial throne for the Holy Spirit
in mighty reviving power.

One evening, while leading the people in prayer, he
received a sensation as if a bolt of electricity had struck
his head and diffused itself through his whole body.
For a little Avhile he stood speechless under the strange
physical feeling. Then he said: "The Holy Spirit has
come ; we wall begin preaching tomorrow evening." He
closed the service with a hymn, dismissed the congre-
gation, and came down from the pulpit; but no one
left the house. The whole congregation had quietly
resumed its seat. Instantly he realized the situation.
The Holy Spirit had not only come to him — 'He had
also taken possession of the hearts of the people.
Immediately he began exhorting them to accept the
Gospel. They began to sob, softly, like the falling of
rain; then, with deeper emotion, to weep bitterly, or
to rejoice loudly, according to their circumstances. It
was midnight before he could dismiss his congrega-

100 The Life "Work of

tion. A noted evangelist from the North, who was
present, said, between his sobs, to an officer of the
church : "I never saw it on this fashion." The meet-
ing went on night and day for eight weeks. Large
numbers of both white and black were converted and
joined the various churches of the city. His own was
wonderfully built up, not only in numbers, but also
in an experience that remained in the church. He was
accustomed to say that he could always count on those
who were converted in that meeting. This was prob-
ably due to the deep work of conviction of sin. the
protracted period of the conviction, the clear sense of
pardon, and the joyful witness of the Spirit to their
adoption.

His sermons during the meetings, as shown by his
notes, were very instructive. He dealt with the great
doctrines of sin, regeneration, faith, justification,
repentance and such subjects. None of those who went
through these meetings ever forgot the wonderful
preaching.

About this period revivals occurred over practically
the whole country, and large numbers of young men
were brought into the church. Dr. Girardeau fre-
quently referred to this as the Lord's mercy in gather-
ing His elect for the great war that was soon to sweep
so many of them into eternity.

After the war another great effort was made to
secure a revival of the same kind. A sunrise prayer
meeting was organized for the sole purpose of pray-
ing for such a work of grace, and although the people
went into it with great enthusiasm and with high
expectations, after several months of earnest and per-
sistent effort many of them began to cease their atten-
dance. Some with stronger faith continued for a year

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 101

before becoming discouraged and finally giving up
hope. In speaking of this great struggle, Dr. Girar-
deau was accustomed to say, "God is a Sovereign."

His ministry was filled with interesting and some-
times exciting circumstances. The following one came
near being tragic: A few years before the war, two
negroes were charged with having killed a white man.
One was captured, the other escaped. The captured one
had ajDplied for membership in Zion church some time
before this occurrence. Dr. Girardeau, as his custom
was, put him on probation. This negro affirmed that
he was only a witness to the killing, and that the other
negro had committed the murder. He was, however,
convicted and hanged. Just after the execution Dr.
Girardeau announced that he would preach on this
negro's death, meaning to use it as a warning to
negroes against bad company, sinful living, and delay
in coming to Christ. Somehow the report got started
that he was going to preach a sermon justifying the
negro. The excited state of public feeling, and the
lack of acquaintance with the young preacher to the
slaves, enabled the report to gain credence. On Sat-
urday evening before the sermon was to be preached,
Mr. Dan Campbell, a member of Zion Church, was on
his way to Summerville when he noticed near the
depot a large crowd of excited men. Joining them, he
found that his pastor was the subject of discussion.
Some were in favor of killing him outright as a dan-
gerous character, others thought best to tar and
feather him and burn the church. Mr. Campbell saw
that the spirit of the mob was dangerous, and, giving
up his trip, hastened to report the matter to his father,
an elder in the church, and a warm friend of Dr. Girar-
deau's. The situation was explained to the mayor, and

102 The Life Work of

a strong guard secured for the church while the white
members of the congi-egation guarded the house of the
preacher, all unknown to him.

On Sunday afternoon, the time for preaching the
sermon, the Charleston Minute Men, as they called
themselves, filled one gallery of the church. They were
all armed and had come for the purpose of shooting the
preacher as soon as the subject should be mentioned.
The opposite gallery was filled with his friends, who
were also armed, and were determined to shoot the
first man who drew a gun. Below were a great mass
of negi'oes, determined that if anything should hap-
pen to their beloved pastor to destroy every "minute
man" in the building. The house, the windows, the
doors, the streets were packed. Dr. Girardeau, accom-
panied by his little son, John, went calmly to the
church, worked his way through the crowd to a side
entrance, and quietly entered his pulpit. After care-
fully looking over his great audience, he bowed his
head and asked the Lord to control their hearts and
minds until they should see the drift of his sermon.
The services went on without excitement on his part,
but when he began to preach the tenseness of his con-
gregation seemed to excite all of his masterful powers
to the very highest activity, and the spell of his elo-
quence soon made Minute Man and churchman and
negro forget what had brought them together. When
he reached his climax and showed the awful con-
sequences of sin in the struggling form of the con-
demned and hanging criminal, and pointed quickly to
the condemned and dying form of the Son of God
making an atonement for the sinner, his audience
broke down. Then, amid their tears and groans, he
exhorted them to faith and repentance. When he

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 103

had finished, the Minute Men stopped to apologize, and
many of them became attendants of his church and
were among the warmest of his admirers. The leader
of the company afterwards entreated him to take a
trip to Europe at his expense.

Another serious case was that of Riley, the hack-
man. This was after the war. Eiley was a negro
Democrat who always voted with the white men, which
displeased the negroes so much that after an election
in which they were defeated, they planned to take
their revenge on him. They watched their chance
until they got him hemmed up in a narrow street. For-
tunately, he was riding a very fine horse, to which he
put spurs and so riding down some and knocking
off others who tried to catch him, he managed to
escape. As he fled Mr. Trenholm, who saw the situa-
tion, opened the gate of his back yard, which, like
many Charleston yards, was enclosed with a high stout
fence, and as soon as Riley was in, closed and locked
the gate. Several of Mr. Trenholm's neighbors gath-
ered, and the negroes were warned not to come into
the yard. In the meantime Riley's wife, hearing of
the trouble, fled from her house to that of Dr. Girar-
deau. And although he promised her protection, he
could not overcome her fear sufficiently to keep her
from running to the garret and hiding herself under
some furniture. A crowd soon followed, crying, "Kill
her! Kill her!" Dr. Girardeau's sons got their shot-
guns and joined their father. He told the crowd that
he was going to protect the woman, and advised them
to leave. Some of the bolder spirits, however, ap-
proached the gate in a threatening manner. He ordered
them to stop, and in a firm, calm way, told them that
the first man who put his foot in the yard would be shot

104 The Life Work of

down. After talking to them for a while, he dismissed
them and they quietly withdrew.

Humorous incidents were constantly occurring. In
the congregation was an old negro who had been
imported from Africa, and who developed real piety,
showing zeal and earnestness in all his Christian duties.
He loved his pastor and imitated him in every pos-
sible way. The congregation, therefore, understood
how he happened, in the open meeting, to pray, "Lord,
be merciful to Thy unworthy servant, our pastor, and
keep him in health that he may do Thy work."

On another occasion one of his negro members asked
another negro to go with him to church. The latter,
refusing on the ground that the church had a white
preacher, received this prompt reply from Dr. Girar-
deau's friend, "Yas, he face is white, but he heart is
black.-'

When the war began Dr. Girardeau went to the
front as chaplain in the Twenty-third South Carolina
Eegiment. His church, like many others in the South,
had to take care of itself. When the war was over and
he returned to Charleston, he found a stricken city and
an impoverished people, with scattered and dismantled
congregations, calling for the exercise of all of his
faith and piety. Although he began work with the
white churches, his heart went out to his old negro
members, many of whom remained in the city. "WTien
these, getting together, formally called him to become
their pastor, he consented, provided the rules that had
governed the church during slavery should still be the
law of the church. To this the negroes heartily agreed,
and he became the pastor of the negroes as well as of
the white people of Glebe Street. This relation con-
tinued until 1869, when the action of the General As-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 105

sembly recommending that the negroes be placed in
sej^arate church, led to the setting off of three hundred
and fifty-five negroes who were organized into a sepa-
rate church, and Dr. Girardeau's relation to them was
ended. During the last two years of his work as pas-
tor of both the white and colored people Dr. J. B, Mack
was associated with him in the work.

CHAPTER IV

THE CONFEDERATE CHAPLAIN

By D. W. McLaurix.

I have been requested to briefly sketch my recollec-
tions of the services of the late Reverend John L. Gir-
ardeau, D. D., as chaplain of the Twenty-third Regi-
ment of the South Carolina Volunteers.

Upon first blush it may appear but a small under-
taking to follow the course and delineate the services
of this active man and eulogize his conduct and trans-
cendent genius. But after the lapse of fifty years,
which have been filled with shifting scenes and ruth-
less contact with this workaday world, I find that the
mind is not so quick to summons to its command the
details of those years of conflict.

It is true that no man who followed the Stars and
Bars as his pillar of cloud by day and his pillar of
fire by night can refrain, at times, from contemplating
retrospectively and living over again the days when he
battled for the life of the Confederacy. When an
attempt is made, however, to summons the actors in
those bloody dramas upon the stage and take a pano-
ramic view of the entire four years of the death-deal-
ing tempest, there are numerous details which escape
the memory and leave only their shadowy forms
behind.

It is needless to mention the impossibility, in a brief
sketch such as this must necessarily be, of doing justice
to the object of the discourse, and in my portrayal there

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 107

will of necessity appear very often the personal pro-
noun.

In treating of the army life of our chaplain, it will
be necessary to follow, in a casual way, the checkered
career of our regiment, and in doing so, it will only be
necessary to recall that throughout the varying vicissi-
tudes, the hardships of the march, the bloody carnage
of the battlefield, or the quiet and less dramatic routine
of the camp, he was ever with us, inspiring confidence
by his presence, inculcating a just conception of our
duty to our country and to our God.

In the summer of 1861 Col. L. M. Hatch organized
four companies from Charleston District into a bat-
talion for coast service. In the early fall six compa-
nies from the Piedmont section of South Carolina were
added to it and organized as the Twenty-third regi-
ment of South Carolina Volunteers. It was upon this
organization that Doctor John L. Girardeau was
appointed to attend as chaplain. Here began the ser-
vices that were to end only with his capture, which
occurred when the bleeding Confederacy w^as tottering
to its fall.

The regiment, as it assembled on Morris Island, was
composed of four companies from Charleston, A, B, C,
and D; two companies from Marion, E and H; Com-
pany F from Chester; Company G from Marlboro;
Company I from Clarendon, and Company K from
Sumter. This was the consummation of the organiza-
tion, and we began regular battalion and regimental
drill. About this time was begun the construction of
Fort Wagener, which later assisted in withstanding
the Federal siege.

It was near Fort Wagener in March, 1862, that a
vessel, while trying to run the blockade, was grounded,

108 The Life Work of

and so near was it to our position that at low tide a
large number of our regiment waded out to it for the
purpose of saving the cargo. The Union gunboats
immediately opened fire upon us. As I had been
drilled in artillery practice prior to this time, I was
detailed by the colonel of the regiment to take position
behind a sand hill with two pieces of field artillery
and return the fire. After a spirited duel, lasting sev-
eral minutes, the Union boats withdrew, leaving three
of our men wounded b}- fragments of shells. We then
proceeded to bring the remainder of the cargo ashore
and burn the vessel.

We continued our routine camp duties until April,
when we were reorganized and enlisted for the war.
Capt. H. L. Benbow was elected colonel of the regi-
ment, Capt. R. H. Roberts, lieutenant-colonel, and John
R. Wilden, major.

On the fifteenth day of the following June we were
to be brought for the first time within sight of the
clash of arms. The enemy made a desperate assault
upon the fortifications of Secession ville, James Island,
and after a desperate struggle, were repulsed by a por-
tion of Evans' Brigade and driven to their boats in
Stono River.

Immediately following this repulse there occurred
an incident worth relating. The ascendency of the
Christ -spirit above human nature was never better
exemplified. Dr. Girardeau, though one of the most
ardent of Southerners, one, in fact, who was never
reconstructed, went down on his knees by these dying
Union soldiers and offered up fervent prayers to his
God for their final salvation. R. E. Seabrook described
this incident to the News and Courier in the following
language:

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 109

"The death of the lamented Dr. J. L. Girardeau
recalls an incident of the desperate assault on the
earthworks of Secessionville, James Island, during
the late war, which has never been published, and yet
is not only worthy of record, but also eminently char-
acteristic of the Christian charity of that good and
great man.

"On the morning of June 16, 1862, I, with others of
my command, was detailed to act as one of a bodyguard
and as a courier for Gen. N. G. Evans, in command of
our troops engaged in defence of James Island. Imme-
diately after the gallant repulse of the enemy. General
Evans rode into the earthworks in order to make
arrangements to meet a second assault, momentarily
expected.

"As we approached the rear of the work, the first
thing that attracted my attention was a large number —
fifty or more — of mortally wounded and dying Fed-
eral soldiers, who had been collected and placed in the
excavation behind the magazine. In the midst of these,
on his knees, was Dr. Girardeau offering up an earnest
and eloquent prayer for those dying soldiers, so lately
the enemies of all he loved. I was so moved I forgot
war and the dangers incident thereto. In Adew of the
fact that Dr. Girardeau was an ardent, if not bitter,
advocate of Southern rights, this triumph of Christian
virtue over human nature, this absolute forgiveness
accorded to dying and no longer active enemies, empha-
sized his God-like soul and brings out in radiant light
the benediction of this true disciple of the Master.
The scene, as witnessed under such tragic surroundings,
is worthy of an artist's brush and deserves to be handed
down as a study, exemplifying, as it does, the influence
of Christ's teachings in the most trying circumstances.

110 The Life Work of

'Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who tres-
pass against us.' *'

By the 20th day of June the Seventeenth, Eigh-
teenth, Twenty-second and Twenty-third regiments,
and Holcomb's Legion were combined into a brigade,
and N. G. Evans was placed in command. Then began
our work in earnest. Our regimental and brigade
drills became a serious matter, as we realized that we
were preparing for active service in Virginia.

In the latter part of that memorable month of June,
1862, our brigade was ordered to Virginia, to the great
delight of all. We passed through Richmond and
were stationed at Thayer's Farm for a few days, only
to break camp on a minute's notice and take up the
march for Malvern Hill and there, under General
Longstreet, to participate in the historic battle of
that name. The slaughter on that day was fearful,
and the fighting continued long after darkness had
fallen. Through the drenching rain on the following
morning we looked for the enemy in vain; they had
withdrawn under cover of darkness.

While awaiting the designated hour for the assault,
Dr. Girardeau showed his earnest solicitation for the
spiritual and physical man by speaking words of hope
and cheer, and urging all to pray for Divine assistance.
Upon this bloody field we saw the tender consideration
with which he treated the wounded. Confederate and
Federal alike, and here was the real beginning of my
friendship for that prince of men, which afterwards
became cemented by the common brotherhood of suffer-
ing and privations which we underwent together.
From this time on to the close of the war Dr. Girar-
deau became more closely associated with our regiment,

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. Ill

until he became the personal friend of every man with
whom he came in contact.

Within a few days we were issued five days' rations
and twenty-five rounds more of ammunition and took
up the march for Richmond. Here we were loaded on
the cars and carried over to Gordonsville, and there
saw for the first time the idol of the South, and the
terror of the Union lines, G^n. Thomas J. Jackson.

History is replete with illustrations of hardships
borne by the men in the ranks. Southern history, at
least, rings with applause for the immortal Stonewall
Jackson and his famous foot cavalry. From this time
on to the close of the war we were to undergo the same
hardships that gave the Stonewall brigade a place in
history. We were moved as men upon a chess board.
From Gordonsville we were marched to Martin's Cross
Roads and went into camp for several days.

A glance at any authentic history will readily reveal
the forced marches, the skirmishes, and the fights in
which we participated from Malvern Hill to Second
Manassas. On several occasions, when the weary sol-
diers were staggering along, scarcely able to go, after
having marched all day and night. Dr. Girardeau
would dismount and lend his horse to some one and he
would take up the march with the regiment.

After a hard march we reached the Rapidan River
and were permitted a few hours rest. Early in the fol-
lowing morning we were awakened by the dull roar of
cannon and the rattle of musketry, and on the distant
hills we could see the blue lines in motion. We forded
the river, formed in line of battle and continued in
our position until far into the day. Under a heavy
artillery fire here, we lost the first man in our com-
pany— Corporal J. W. Allen. The summer sun on

112 The Life Work of

this sultry da}' was almost unbearable, but toward
evening we began our march for the Eappahannock.

Here followed a chain of events which would have
been laughable, indeed, had it not been so serious.
We were ordered to store our baggage for transporta-
tion to Brandy Station. An unfortunate cavalry raid
destroyed all of our possessions, and for months we
were forced to forego the pleasures of a change of
clothing. Kain, dust, and heat were alike deposited on
everybody's one and only uniform.

On the 28th of August we arrived at Manassas Gap
and halted for the night. AMien the first gray streaks
of dawn were lighting the Virginia sky on the morning
of the 29th, we were ordered to fall in line and began a
double quick march for Bull Run.

We met the enemy on this little stream, already made
famous by the battle of that name, fought on its banks
one year before. The fighting was hard and the ground
stubbornly contested ; however, we succeeded in driving
the blue lines back, and just before night repulsed a
determined cavalry charge. We rested on our arms
that night and awoke to reneAv the conflict.

In the early hours of the morning the hills echoed
with the roar of artillery, and the battle was begun.
The enemy made a desperate attack on our lines, but
were repulsed. One attack followed another; the
lines surged back and forth; first advancing and then
receding, and so it continued throughout the day. As
the night was closing in on this bloody field the Union
lines began breaking up and General Lee ordered a
charge along the whole line.

General Hood advanced his Texans to the front and
right, and our brigade followed over the same ground
where the havoc that had been wrought was easily dis-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 113

cernable. The ground was strewn with the dead and
dying. Hood's Texas Rangers had made a desperate
assault. To our left was Walker and his Alabamians.
This was one of the most fatal battles of the war for
our regiment. We advanced under heavy artillery and
musketry fire Avhich was literally sweeping the field.
Colonel Benbow and Major Wilden were both wounded,
of which wound the latter died a week later.

We were ordered to take the Union battery which
was dealing its iron death to our ranks. We would
fall down until the discharge was fired over our heads
and arise and run. This continued until we were
within about a hundred yards of the battery, when we
gave the rebel yell, dashed up the incline, sweeping
everything before us. We captured the battery and
pursued the enemy until after dark, when a halt was
ordered for the night. Lieutenant-Colonel Roberts
received a fatal wound in this charge, of which he died
a week later.

Another great battle had been won, but at a fearful
cost. More than two-thirds of our regiment was killed
or wounded. Many are the recorded acts of heroic con-
duct on this bloody field, but, like the man in the ranks,
without whom there could be no army nor ever a
battle won, but whose name is never mentioned in song
or story, so was our beloved chaplain as he moved
among us, constantly exposed to the deadly fire of the
enemy, trying to alleviate the suifering of the wounded,
and assist them in making peace with their God before
being ushered into His presence.

Following this great battle came our first Maryland
campaign. Dr. Girardeau did not accompany the regi-
ment into Maryland. He remained by the bedside of
his friends, Lieutenant-Colonel Roberts and Major

114 The Life Work of

Wilden, until his vigilance was relieved by the grim
reaper, Death, which carried those intimate friends
across the still waters within fifteen minutes of each
other. Beyond the Potomac we were in the midst of
the fight. Boonsboro and Antietam, or Sharpsburg, as
it was called, are too fully set forth upon the pages of
history to require any review at my hands. After the
latter, however — one of the bloodiest battles of the
entire war — we about faced and retraced our march
across the Potomac into Virginia.

We went into camp near Winchester, and were here
joined by Dr. Girardeau, to the great delight of all.
Here we were allowed to rest and recuperate, and we
were joined by a number of those who had been pre-
vented by wounds and sickness. In this quiet and beau-
tiful valley of the Shenandoah was constructed a rough
house of worship, in which prayer services were held
regularly by the subject of this sketch.

In the early days of December, 1862, we were started
on the march for Fredericksburg, but had gone only a
short distance when our regiment was loaded on the
cars, which were covered with snow, and passed
through Richmond to Tarboro, N. C. A wait of sev-
eral days and we were moved on to Kinston, and then
went into encampment near New Bern.

Our brief stay here was among the most enjoyable
of the war. We were furnished with fresh vegetables
and various other foods that were soon thereafter to
become unknown in our army. But the All-Wise Dis-
penser has seen fit to allow the mingling of the bitter
with the sweet ; to allow the poisonous vine to entwine
itself around the vines of luscious grapes. So, neces-
sarily, when the country was overrun with the iron
heel of war, and the blood of patriots flowed on every

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 115

field, we could not remain idle. General Foster, of the
Union army was approaching Goldsboro with seven
thousand men for the purpose of destroying the rail-
road. General Evans, with his brigade of twenty-five
hundred men, marched out to intercept him and save
the railroad. After a desperate struggle we succeeded
in pressing them back and finally drove them from the
field, from which they retired to New Bern. We fol-
lowed as far as Kinston, where we remained until the
first of December, and from there went to Wilmington,
N. C, where we were quartered for the winter.

In the following March we were transported to
Charleston, S. C, and over to Mount Pleasant and
Sullivan's Island. We remained here for over a month,
enjoying good things sent from home and seeing some
of our friends from various parts of the State.

In May Col. A. D. Smith, with the Twenty-sixth
regiment, joined our brigade and remained with us
throughout the remainder of the war. Shortly after
this we were ordered to report at Jackson, Miss. It
appeared that Gen. Joseph E. Johnston was concen-
trating his forces here with a view of relieving Vicks-
burg, which was undergoing that historic siege. Upon
our arrival we went into camp on the bank of Pearl
River. About the 1st of July we were marched up the
Big Black River and on toward Vicksburg. We were
halted without warning and about-faced and marched
back. All was in confusion; there seemed to be some
mystery about this strange proceeding, and finally the
news was whispered down the line that Vicksburg,
with all its garrison, had surrendered.

The hardships of this march were almost unbearable.
The road was ground into a fine dust several inches
deep; there was no water to be had except from cow

116 The Life Work of

ponds, which were stagnant and pregnant with the seeds
of pestilence and death. All this, under a July sun,
contributed to the hardships. The Union army was
following close upon our heels. General Johnston
halted and threw up temporary works and awaited the
attack, which came with great energy. These assaults
continued for eight days, always with great vigor, but
we succeeded in repulsing them with heavy loss.

Our regiment bore the brunt of the battle in these
engagements. We were sent out as skirmishers. One
shell wounded the color-bearer, Elwell, who lost his
right arm. After the war he became a minister in the
South Carolina Conference of the Methodist Church.
Two of the color-guards were also wounded and one
was killed. I alone of the five remained unhurt, and
carried the colors for some time thereafter.

General Johnston then evacuated Jackson and fell
back on Meridian but was not followed.

In August we were ordered to Savannah, Ga., where
we went into camp on the Isle of Hope for a short time,
and then were moved to Charleston. S. C, and stationed
on Sullivan's Island, doing picket duty on Long Island
and relieving the garrison at Fort Sumter, occasion-
ally, for several months.

Early in January. 1864, we were again moved to
Wilmington, X. C, where we remained until the fol-
lowing May, when we were ordered to meet Butler at
Bermuda Hundred, Va., on which point he was mov-
ing for the purpose of destroying the railroads. After
continual engagements for some time we succeeded in
driving the Union forces away from the railroad.

On the loth day of June we were ordered to Peters-
burg to meet General Grant. On the morning of the
16th there was some skirmishing, and in the afternoon
the fighting was severe for several hours, continuing

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 117

at intervals until far into the night. By dawn on the
following morning the battle was in full progress.
There was charge and counter charge along the whole
line of battle. The unabating fury extended far into
the evening without cessation. About dusk the Union
army made a desperate assault on our lines, and after
a death struggle at each others' throats, our line was
broken, and for a time the situation was serious indeed,
but we were reinforced and the battle broke out with
renewed fury and continued until after midnight,
when the Union army withdrew and left us in posses-
sion of the field.

On this night we were ordered to desert our lines,
fall back a few hundred yards and reform. General
Beauregard had found his lines entirely too long for
the number of men he had, so we took a position nearer
to Petersburg and began to dig, with split canteens,
bayonets, tin plates, and anything that we could get,
that could be used, to erect our fortifications, and this
was the line permanently established and the begin-
ning of that formidable line of breastworks that defied
Grant and the whole Northern army for nearly a year.

In the early morning of the 18th the conflict was
renewed. By noon the assault was terrific, as the
Union army hurled brigade after brigade against our
newly made works, and their guns assisted, but with
little effect. Night came and there was a temporary
lull, and then could be seen the fearful cost at which
the Federals had made their determined but futile
attack, as the ground was thickly strewn with their
dead.

On the evening of the 18th the two great armies had
come into line facing each other for the death grapple,
this time for the settlement forever of the issues by

118 The Life Work of

force of arms. Grant and Lee, those grim adversaries,
stood in full battle array for the final conflict, the siege
of Petersburg had begun.

In the trenches for days, weeks and months, Dr. Gir-
ardeau was always with the soldiers, bearing their pri-
vations and undergoing the same hardships with them,
always lending cheer to all with whom he came in con-
tact. He held regular prayer meetings even under these
trying conditions, and many times he came into the
trenches and, gathering a little crowd around him,
expounded the Scripture and prayed with them. On
these occasions, so close were the lines together, that
our singing would attract the attention of the Union
gunners and cause them to open fire on us.

On one occasion. Dr. Dabney, the chaplain of the
Army of Xorthern Virginia, invited Dr. Girardeau to
conduct services for him in Petersburg. The house was
crowded to the extent of its capacity, and just before
the services began Gen. Robert E. Lee and his staff
came in and occupied the seats reserved on the rostrum.
Although the siege was in full blast, under the magic
of his eloquence we were forced away from the con-
sideration of this mundane sphere and given a picture
of the world where bloodshed is unknown.

Conditions gradually grew worse in the trenches.
We could not expose the least part of our person above
the works without the imminent danger of being picked
off by a sharpshooter's bullet. The war had practically
narrowed down to the desire to kill, regardless of how
it was done. There were no more battles fought as in
the first few years of the struggle, but from morning
until night, and throughout the night the Union bat-
teries were never hushed.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 119

There was but little change in general conditions
until July, when it became apparent to all that the
enemy was tunnelling somewhere, probably under our
works, as we could see from day to day fresh dirt which
they were hauling out. So sure of this fact had some
of our generals become that they sank several shafts
and tunnelled before our works for the purpose of
intercepting their tunnel. This, however, proved a
failure, as we did not intercept them.

History records the fatal occurrence of the Crater^
but it may not be amiss for me to state here that our
regiment was stationed directly over this mine from
the 18th day of June until the 29th day of July, when
we were moved about a hundred yards up the trenches
to our right, and the Twenty-second Regiment took our
place.

About 4 :30 on the morning of the 30th of July the
whole earth seemed to tremble, and to our left there
shot far into the heavens a solid mass of fire, smoke,
cannon, timbers and human beings, as if a volcano had
been born in a minute. The expected had come, but
even though expected, it was a great surprise. We
were in position in a few minutes, however, ready for
the attack that we were certain would follow.

The smoke had scarcely died away when the Union
lines surged up to the mouth of the crater, and we
opened a death-dealing fire upon them. They halted,
swung to the right and went into the mouth of the
crater. Charge after charge was made with like result.
One brigade of negroes was among those who were
hurled into this crater. Our mortar batteries were sta-
tioned back of this seething mine and the iron hail was
terrific. The hole was soon filled with the dead and
dying. Several attempts were made by the Federals to

120 The Life Work of

pass around the crater and occupy Cemetery Hill in
the rear, but they, like those who had come before,
were hurled back to the same doom.

Our regiment lost heavier in this engagement than
in any other during the war. The ensign, D. J. Kelly,
was killed and Corporal Eichbourg, and one of the
color-guards Avounded. I and one other of the color-
guards escaped injury.

We were in the midst of the fight from the time of
the explosion until the last charge was made about 3
o'clock in the afternoon, when we drove them from the
crater. We buried our dead in the rear, and hundreds
of the men in blue in the crater and in front of the
works. Under the July sun the stench from the dead
men and the blood was almost unbearable, and this
continued for months. Xo one who has never under-
gone such an experience can realize the conditions as
they really were.

The siege continued without cessation. We were
always in the trenches, except for a day or two at the
time, when we were moved out to rest and others took
our places. Xot only were we fighting overwhelming
odds in our front, but daily the contest Avith famine
grew more acute. We were half clad and shivering
over feeble fires, exposed to snow and sleet with the
pangs of hunger, an ever present companion, while
sickness and disease grew apace.

As the spring opened General Grant began moboliz-
ing his entire force before Petersburg for the final
struggle. The Confederate lines had been stretched
until they were almost ready to break of their own
weight. To the far-sighted the fall of the Confederacy
was imminent and inevitable. Only that hope which
"springs eternal in the human breast" was left us. The

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 121

South must succumb to the overwhelming numbers and
powerful material resources of the North, despite its
courage and sacrifice.

At about 4 o'clock on the morning of the 25th day of
March, 1865, our regiment composed a part of the
storming force under the intrepid John B. Gordon for
the capture of Fort Stedman. As the signal gun was
fired we rushed across the open space between the lines,
captured the batteries and turned them on the blue
hosts that were swarming around us. This fort was
situated about the center of the Federal lines. Their
batteries of each side commanded a direct sweep of the
field, and their entire batteries were turned on us. The
carnage was fearful, as charge after charge was made
against us and repulsed with heavy loss.

Our anticipated support never came. We captured
the fort and held it as long as possible under the with-
ering fire of the Federal batteries and the concentrated
musketry fire, but with the small force we had it was
impossible to long hold back the contending hosts, and
those who were not killed or wounded drifted back to
our lines. So ended this forlorn hope of our beleaguered
army.

It was now apparent that General Lee was desirous
of uniting his army with that under Johnston, so the
evacuation of the trenches and the retreat followed.

I shall not attempt to follow step by step our move-
ments until the surrender at Appomattox, as our des-
perate struggle for a lease of life, even when bound
hand and foot, are too well known to all to require
mention from me. On the retreat, however, at one time
we were engaged in a desperate struggle far in the
night. Dr. Girardeau approached the colonel of the
regiment, touched him on the shoulder, asked if his

122 The Life Work of

men were not aiming too high, and suggested that they
be ordered to aim lower. Shortly after this occurrence
Dr. Girardeau was captured by the enemy, and I shall
briefly refer to that again.

Then came the closing scene of one of the greatest
tragedies ever enacted on the world's stage. Four such
acts as the world had never seen before, were played to
their conclusion. Xow the last act was over, the cur-
tain fell, the actors disappeared from the stage, the
lights were extinguished, the Confederacy was dead.

The following is an article taken from the Christian
Oh server^ coming from the pen of Rev. H. C. DuBose,
D. D.:

"On the retreat from Richmond, April, 1865, besides
the decimated battalions of a noble army, two chap-
lains, James McDowell and J. L. Girardeau, were rid-
ing along together, when they alighted and sat beside
the road conversing on the stern realities of the gloomy
situation. 'The Federals are coming,' sounded along
the lines. The former rode forward and joined his own
brigade, while in fifteen minutes the latter, with his
brave comrades, was captured and on his way to John-
son's Island. He returned from prison about the 1st
of July to his family, who had found a secure refuge
in the 'back woods' of Darlington County, S. C.

"One of his fellow-captives, Capt. W. E. James, who
was a member of the theological class in the island fort-
ress, soon arranged for him to hold ten days' services
in the Darlington church. Veterans from all over the
district, with their wives and daughters, gathered to
hear the Gospel chieftain. On Sunday morning, to an
immense audience, he preached on the 'Judgment Day.'
The vast galleries were packed, and just in front of
me a young man of noble birth, but deaf and dumb,

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 123

stood motionless as in mute astonishment and with
fixed gaze he beheld the face of the inspired orator,
now pale with fear, then flushed with anger, at
one time beaming with exquisite tenderness, and at
another transfigured before the congregation. He lis-
tened, as only the deaf can, through the portals of the
eyes, to the sweet notes of welcome, 'Come, ye blessed,'
uttered by Zion's judge to the host ascending to the
sky with thundering hallelujahs; or to the deep moans
of the lost descending to the pit, as they were depicted
by the shifting lights and shadows on the face of this
prince of preachers. It was the grandest tribute paid
to sacred eloquence that it was ever my lot to behold.

"Soon Dr. Girardeau returned to Charleston, invited
by the scattered remnants of the white Presbyterian
congregation, and was met at the depot by the colored
members of the church, who desired to bear him on
their shoulders through the streets, and could scarce be
restrained in their superabounding enthusiasm.

"In a foot note the editor of the volume of his ser-
mons, published by The State Company^ says : 'There
is nothing in the manuscript of Dr. Girardeau to show
when this sermon was prepared.' Either at the time
mentioned or during my seminary course I heard
some minister remark that Dr. Girardeau said he 'wrote
it in 1858 and had never altered the manuscript.'

"Here, a half century having passed, a lad, who was
in the gallery of his old home church, and who heard
that sermon on the July after the sword was returned
to the scabbard, sits July, 1908, now no longer young,
in his Chinese study translating this same sermon into
the language of Simin, to form with biblical material
already prepared, the forty-eighth chapter in his
'Christian Theology.' If now and then he paused in

124 The Life Work of

his pleasant though difficult task and retired from
where he was dictating to his writer to allow the unbid-
den tear to fall, and the thought would arise, 'Why-
should a man who could preach like this die?' the
response would soon be heard in the depths of his
soul, 'He is not dead, but speaketh in the tongue of
earth's ancient nation for whose evangelization he so
earnestly and so frequently pleaded in the pulpits of
the Southland.' "

My labors might well end here as I have, in a very
unsatisfactory manner, followed like a thread the
movements of our regiment. In fact, this may appear
to some as more of a sketch of that regiment than of
him who forms the basis of the narrative, but it would
be impossible to give an idea of his hardships without
briefly setting forth those imposed on the regiment
with which he was associated. And in this connection
I shall append an estimate of him by Dr. J. H.
McNeilly, of Nashville, Tenn., and a few excerpts from
some of his addresses delivered after peace was restored.

Dr. McNeilly says:

"Among the many ministers with whom I have been
associated in the course of my ministry of fifty-six
years; my memory most frequently returns to the Kev.
John L. Girardeau, D. D., of Columbia, S. C, as the
one who, in a brief time, most influenced my ideals of
the ministry of the Gospel, and inspired me with
enthusiasm in my calling.

"My personal association with Dr. Girardeau was
confined to three months during the War between the
States, in 1863, though we had occasional correspond-
ence by letter, and I met him two or three times on his
journeys in the interest of Columbia Seminary.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 125

"In the campaign under General Jos. E. Johnston for
the relief of Vicksburg, I was chaplain of the Forty-
ninth Tennessee Infantry — a young preacher recently
graduated from the Danville, Kentucky, Seminary.
Evans' Brigade of South Carolina troops was sent from
Virginia to reinforce General Johnston in Mississippi.
One of the regiments of that brigade was Colonel Ben-
bow's, of which Dr. Girardeau was chaplain. I had
heard a great deal of him as a preacher to the negroes,
and as I was an enthusiast about that work, I at once
sought him out, and a close friendship was then formed
which continued to his death.

"As I was cut off from books, it was my habit during
the war to get everything I could out of every preacher
I met. As the pumping process went on, in many cases,
it did not take long to exhaust the wells, which were
not always deep, and soon my bucket drew up sand and
mud. But with Dr. Girardeau I never reached the bot-
tom. There came up cool, clear, refreshing waters.

"I was impressed by his wonderful power as a
preacher, and by his fluency, clearness, and deep
thought in conversation, always brightened by a gentle
and vivacious humor that relieved it of tedium.

"I took every opportunity to hear him preach to the
soldiers. His voice was a marvelous instrument, clear
as a bell, sounding like a bugle, or melting into ten-
derest pathos, he could sound the triumph of victory,
the deepest notes of passion, or the gentlest tones of
love. He generally preached for an hour; and chose
for his subjects the highest themes of the gospel. I
remember one of his sermons was on the 'Influence of
the atonement on other worlds than ours.' I don't
remember the text, but it was something showing
angels' interest in man's salvation, 'which things the

126 The Life Work of

angels desire to look into.' His sermons abounded in
appeals to the reason, and while magnifying God's love,
they were equally strong in asserting God's justice. He
had a passion for righteousness. His manner was a
vivacious conversational address: and as some great
thought flashed before him, his voice rose to the highest
range of impassioned utterance, his language became
vivid, while his whole frame quivered with emotion.

"I have heard him preach to 1,000 to 1,500 soldiers,
and with all the distractions of camp about them,
sometimes in expectation of immediate battle, the whole
mass of men were held spellbound by his eloquence. I
think not a man left the audience.

"As another example of his power as a preacher, this
was told me by my cousin, a major of artillery, who was
a prisoner at Johnson's Island. Dr. Girardeau was
taken prisoner and carried to the island. He preached
very often in the prison. His platform was the center
of a great circle from which the streets radiated to the
various sections of the barracks. My cousin told me
that when Dr. Girardeau preached, not only the circle,
but the streets as far as he could be heard, were crowded
with eager listeners. Confederates and Federal guards
all mingled together, held by a common interest. He
said many men dated their conversion from these ser-
vices.

"As an illustration of Dr. Girardeau's power in the
pulpit, I will mention an incident that occurred in
Nashville, some time in the seventies. Dr. T. A. Hoyt,
a classmate and warm friend of Dr. Girardeau, was
pastor of the First Church, and I was pastor of Wood-
land Street. We were holding a joint meeting in the
First Church, and I was doing the preaching. Dr.
Girardeau was passing through Nashville, and stopped

John L. Gikardeau, D. D., LL. D. 127

over a day with his old classmate. Of course we had
him to preach. The service was held in the basement
of the church; there were 600 or 700 people present.
He preached from the text : 'Him that cometh unto Me,
I will in no wise cast out.' He lost sight of everything
but the loving Saviour, with wide arms of mercy, wel-
coming returning sinners. As he closed I and the whole
audience were standing, leaning forward.

"In conversation Dr. Girardeau was admirable. He
would listen with an interested manner to my dreams
and speculations, and if I happened to suggest a
thought that took hold of him, he would throw his arms
around me and give me a big hug. He had the faculty
of all great conversers, of taking a crude thought and
passing it through the crucible of his own mind and
giving it back to you rich and full with new meaning.
We had the habit, after the day's march or after camp
duties were over, of getting together and talking late
into the night. I had read Sir Wm. Hamilton's Lec-
tures before leaving the Seminary, and he was an
enthusiast on metaphysical subjects. I remember he
expressed his opinion of a brother minister thus: 'A
good man, a strong man, a fine preacher, but he don't
care a button for the absolute.'

"The last night we were together was at Meridian,
Mississippi. His brigade had been ordered back to
the East, and was to start the following morning. We
spread our blankets on the depot platform a little after
dark. As we talked, or as I listened, I took no note of
time. I was fascinated. After a while I saw, as I
thought, the moon rising, and remarked, 'Now we'll get
more light on our subject.' But it was the sun rising —
we had spent the whole night in this soul communion.

128 The Life Work of

"I had but little chance to see his ministrations to
the wounded and dying, for my attention was taken
up with my own suffering comrades, but at the Battle
of Jackson, Mississippi, after the fall of Vicksburg, all
of our wounded were taken to a camp across Pearl
River, and there I could note the tenderness and faith-
fulness of his ministrations, as he held up Christ cruci-
fied as the onh^ hope of a sinner. All his preaching,
that I heard in the army, was full of appeal to men to
accept Christ and trust him for life or death."

In 1866, at Magnolia Cemetery, Dr. Girardeau deliv-
ered an address in memory of the Confederate dead,
from which the following is taken :

"We are here as mourners today. We hsLve repaired
to this burial ground to mingle the tears of a common
sorrow, and to pay that tribute of respect to our
deceased soldiers which was previously prevented by
the hindrances of war. The act which we are assem-
bled to perform is suggested not by acrimony toward
the living, but by affection for the dead. ... It affords,
it is true, not only an expression of our grief over the
ashes of our heroes, but of our admiration for their
character, and our love for their memory and their
names; but there is no noble and generous spirit, even
among those who were victors in the great and san-
guinary struggle through which we have passed, tliat
would refuse us the consolation of dropping a tear, and
of lajdng our chaplets of cypress upon the graves of
our dead.

"WHiether they were right or wrong in the prosecu-
tion of the contest which cost them their lives, the
men whose sunken graA^es we repair, and whose mem-
ory we honor, died for us. We can never, never forget
that thev were sacrificial victims on the altar which

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 129

we helped to rear, and that their blood was poured out
like water in defence of principles which we avowed,
and which we counseled and exhorted them to main-
tain to the last extremity. For that cause which we as
well as they regarded as the exponent of constitutional
liberty, and Avhich, during its protracted and agon-
izing struggle for existence, we loved with a passionate
intensity which no words can express — for that cause
these men encountered every hardship, underwent
every privation, and freely sacrificed their lives. . . .

"The blood, the precious, priceless blood of our
brethren, may seem to have been drunk up by the
earth in vain — but whatever of truth, whatever of
right, whatever of pure and lofty principle there was
for which they contended and for Avhich they died,
may, in another day, in some golden age, sung by
poets, sages and prophets, come forth in the resurrec-
tion of buried principles and live to bless mankind,
when the bones of its confessors and martyrs shall
have mouldered into dust."

At this same spot, when the dead were being re-in-
terred from Gettysburg, he ended his address as fol-
lows :

"Heroes of Gettysburg! Champions of constitu-
tional rights! Martyrs for regulated liberty! Once
again, farewell ! Descend to your final sleep with a
people's benediction upon your names! Kest ye here,
soldiers of a defeated — God grant it may not be a
wholly lost — Cause ! We may not fire a soldier's salute
over your dust, but the pulses of our hearts beat like
muffled drums, and every deep-drawn sigh breathes a
low and passionate requiem. Memory will keep her
guard of honor over your graves; Love will bedew
them with her tears; Faith will draw from them her

130 The Life Work of

inspiration for future sacrifice; and Hope, kindling
her torch at the fires which glow in your ashes, will,
in its light, look forward to a day when a people once
more redeemed and enfranchised will confess that your
death w^as not in vain."

In a sermon preached in the Second Presbyterian,
now the Arsenal Hill Presbyterian Church, immedi-
ately after the death of Jefferson Davis, he used this
language :

"Alas, brethren and friends, our own pathetic cir-
cumstances have made us witnesses of the transitori-
ness of all earthly power. Less than thirty years ago,
a young country sprung at once into lusty vigor, the
co-ordinate and the peer of the mighty nations of the
world. Maintaining principles tinctured by the blood
of Revolutionary j^atriots, illustrated by brilliant mili-
tary genius, borne forward by the intrepid, the daunt-
less, the unconquerable valor of her sons, she seemed
destined to win assured existence in the teeth of for-
midable odds, and to wrest her independence from the
hands of fate.

"The mediatorial sovereign determined otherwise.
The crash of final disaster came, and that country went
down into the grave wrapped in her own blood-dyed
and battle-torn starry cross, Avith all her disarmed and
broken-hearted children gathered round, and shedding
the tears of an inconsolable grief. Her sun, whose rays
had dazzled the eyes of the on-looking nations, sunk
beneath the horizon, and beam after beam of the reced-
ing splendor has vanished from the sky, as hero after
hero has descended to the tomb.

"One memorial light still remained — a zodiacal light,
shooting its columns into the heavens and continuing
to mark the wake of the departed glory. That, too,

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 131

has now faded away from the firmament, and dark-
ness settles upon the scene. Jefferson Davis is no more.
The distinguished man, who was the representative of
a cause we once called ours, has gone to the eternal
sphere. His spirit has passed beyond the consciousness
of earth's praise and censures, and his body reposes in
the gray habit of his loved Confederacy. Standing in
imagination, with bowed heads, reverent mien, and
falling tears besides the bier on which the illustrious
chieftain sleeps his last sleep, contemplating the trans-
itoriness of all earthly power, the evanescence of all
earthly glory, encompassed with a sea of uncertainty,
threatening to swell into the stormy tumult of com-
munism and anarchy, let us turn for refuge to the
immovable kingdom of Jesus Christ.

"All hail, undying King; enthroned on Zion's hill,
conqueror of Herod and Pilate, of Jew and Gentile, of
sin and satan, death and hell, triumphant recipient of
the praises of angelic hosts, of the plaudits of the uni-
verse ! We roll our interests for time and eternity
upon thy everlasting, almighty, invincible arms. None
who confide in Thee are ever confounded. Blessed, O
Lord of armies, is the people, blessed is the man that
trusteth in Thee!"

It was twenty years after the storm had died aw^ay
and the waves had become still, before I saw Dr. Girar-
deau again. I met him then at synod in Abbeville,
S. C. The last time it was ever my pleasure to be in
his company was on the 18th day of December, 1866,
when he dedicated the Presbyterian Church at Little
Rock, S. C. On that occasion I entertained him in
my home.

I shall leave those intervening years to some one else
to portray, and merely submit this as my tribute to the

132 The Life Work of

most sublime, the most eloquent, the most devoutly
Christian man with whom I have ever been associated.
He, like the soldiers over whose graves he so eloquenth-
pleaded, laid everything on the altar of his country,
and received from the wreck of war nothing but the
gratitude and love of his comrades.

CHAPTER V

PASTORATE AFTER THE WAR

By Thos. H. Law, D. D.

When the Confederacy fell and hostilities between
the North and the South ceased, Rev. J. L. Girardeau
was languishing as a prisoner of war on Johnson's
Island. For three years or more he had been serving
faithfully, zealously and acceptably as chaplain of the
Twenty-third South Carolina Regiment, and on the
final retreat of the Army of Northern Virginia,
although a non-combatant and pursuing strictly his
spiritual duties, he was taken prisoner along with
other chaplains, surgeons and non-combatants, who,
according to the rules of civilized warfare, should
have been undisturbed, and hustled off, first to Wash-
ington City, and then, despite the remonstrances
against such unwaranted treatment, to the Federal
prison on Johnson's Island. And here he was held
a prisoner, under all the hardships and cruelties which
have made that prison infamous, until late in June,
long after the war had actually ceased and the Con-
federate armies had been disbanded.

Upon his release, as soon as he could procure the
necessary funds for traveling expenses and decent
clothing, by the sale of his watch and the aid of
friends in Philadelphia, he returned to his family, at
their refugee home, near Timmonsville, S. C. Here I
visited him soon after his arrival, heard from his own
lips the story of his capture and prolonged imprison-
ment, sympathized with him in his keen disappoint-

134 The Life Work of

ment at the sad and unexpected result of the contest
for States' rights and Southern independence, and
shared his righteous indignation at the manner in
which the Federal authorities had dealt with those
who had been so unfortunate as to fall into their cruel
and vengeful hands.

Mr. Girardeau was now nearly forty years of age,
in the prime of a mature and vigorous manhood, and
through his splendid work among the negroes in Char-
leston and among the soldiers in the army, stood at the
height of his reputation as a preacher. Accordingly,
he was in constant demand for pulpit services. Of
course, in the unsettled condition of things and the
interruption of railroad travel just succeeding the war,
he could not go far; but pastors nearby were fre-
quently calling upon him to preach. I myself was
among them, and at Florence, Hartsville and Dar-
lington I heard many noble and delightful sermons
from him in those dark and trying days.

But what about regular work in the future? His
mind naturally turned to his beloved Zion Church in
Charleston, and his heart yearned to be with that dear
flock again. But it had been scattered to the four
Avinds through the exigencies of the war. Hostilities
began at Charleston in 1861; and the city had con-
stantly been threatened with attack ever afterwards
and was frequently shelled by the enemy's batteries
on Morris Island. Consequently, the white population,
as far as practicable, abandoned the city early in the
dread conflict and removed their slaves also to places
of greater security. And at this date the white citi-
zens were only beginning to return, and the negroes,
now emancipated, were scattered all over the country.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 135

Thus Mr. Girardeau could hardly expect for the pres-
ent to resume work with his own former charge.

But about this time, September, 1865, he began to
receive overtures from the Presbyterian young men in
Charleston, many of whom had returned to the smitten
old city and taken up the struggle to recuperate their
lost fortunes and do the work of life, to come down
and preach for them. And as none of the Presbyterian
pastors had yet gotten back to their homes, this seemed
a reasonable projDOsition, and, at the same time, offered
him a favorable opportunity for regular work in the
ministry, and for the support of his family, which,
under the proposed arrangement, was to come entirely
from the weekly Sabbath offerings of the congrega-
tion.

After due consideration Mr. Girardeau accepted this
proposition, and early in September returned to the
old city, which held a very warm place in his loving
heart, and once more resumed his ministerial labors
there, occupying the pulpit of the stately and com-
modious old Second Church building.

At this time there were five Presbyterian Churches
in Charleston: the First or Scotch Church, situated
down town on the corner of Meeting and Tradd
Streets and served as pastor by the Rev. Dr. John
Forrest, but holding an independent relation, not being
as yet connected with Charleston Presbytery; the
Second Church, situated higher up on Meeting Street,
facing Wragg Square and the Citadel, whose pastor
was the eloquent and devoted Dr. Thomas Smyth ; the
Central Church (now Westminster), whose beautiful
and classic building stood also on Meeting near Society
Street, between the two already named, whose pastor
was the Rev. W. C. Dana; Glebe Street Church, at

136 The Life Work of

this time without a pastor; and Zion Church, whose
immense building had been erected by white Presby-
terians for the use of the large congregation of colored
people, whom, together with a small white element, Mr.
Girardeau had been serving as pastor. The members of
these several congregations, as far as they had yet
returned to the city, united in worshipping under Mr.
Girardeau's ministry, in the Second Church building.
But soon the question came up as to permanent
arrangements for the future when all the people of the
city should have returned to their homes. Mr. Girar-
deau was absolutely shut out of his own church build-
ing, which had been taken possession of by a mission-
ary of the Northern Presbyterian Church and held
by the Freedman's Bureau, under the authority of the
United States Government, and its occupancy posi-
tively denied to its legal owners and regularly installed
pastor. And the old arrangement of a small white
element owning and controlling the church and meet-
ing in worship with the negroes, seemed neither desir-
able nor practicable under the new conditions resulting
from the war. Consequently, propositions came from
both the Second and Glebe Street Churches to the
white element and the popular pastor of Zion Church
to come over and unite. Dr. Smyth, who had long
since been crippled, though not disabled, by paralysis,
tendering his resignation as pastor of the Second
Church, so as to open the way for the proposed union
with that church. But Mr. Girardeau was unwilling
to adopt a measure which might appear to push the
venerable, beloved and devoted pastor of the Second
Church out of his long and eminently useful pastorate.
He, therefore, with his white congregation of Zion
Church, accepted the proposition of the Glebe Street

John L. Gikardeau, D. D., LL. D. 137

Church, and, accordingly, this church, in April, 1866,
by order of the Presbytery, was consolidated with the
Zion Church, retaining the officers of both congrega-
tions in the united church, including the pastor, and
holding the name of Zion Church, the regular wor-
ship being conducted in the building on Glebe Street.
And thus Mr. Girardeau entered upon his memorable
pastorate in Charleston after the war.

At this point in my narrative I pause to give my
impressions of Mr. Girardeau as a preacher. He was
a man of superb physique, tall (about five feet ten or
eleven inches), rather slender at this time, though he
grew stouter as age advanced; muscular, agile and
with fine use of his body in every way. And in the
pulpit his action was energetic, graceful and exceed-
ingly impressive — a gesture often thrilling the hearer.
His voice was keen and penetrating, but, at the same
time, smooth and musical. His mind was quick and
logical, with well trained faculties and strongly dis-
posed to reading and study. His taste was poetic — he
often composed beautiful hymns — his imagination
vivid, and his descriptive powers wonderful. His
temperament was ardent and his emotions strong. His
demeanor in the pulpit was dignified, grave and
earnest, indicating that he fully realized his responsi-
bility as an ambassador of Christ and a minister to
dying men. I can never forget the solemn countenance
he carried into the pulpit and the earnestness with
which he read the hymns and conducted the services.
And he threw his whole self, body, mind and spirit,
into his preaching, speaking with a fervor such as I
have rarely seen equalled in the pulpit, and which
deeply impressed his hearers with his zeal for God
and for their souls.

4

138 The Life Work of

He was, too, most faithful in preaching Divine
truth. He received the Bible with unwavering faith
and ardent devotion as the A^ery word of God, and he
never turned aside from it to preach science or phil-
osophy or any other doctrines of men. He was very
plain in preaching, not blinking to discuss sin, judg-
ment and hell, declaring, as Paul did to the Ephesians,
the whole counsel of God and keeping back nothing
that was profitable to his people. At the same time,
he was thoroughly evangelical, glorying in the doc-
trines of grace, and constantly appealing with pas-
sionate fervor unto sinners to believe and be saved.

Mr. Girardeau had a remarkable use of the best
English and great fluency of speech. He wrote ele-
gantly and beautifully, and sometimes on special occa-
sions used a manuscript in the pulpit ; but very rarely,
and greatly to the disadvantage of his preaching. He
was a splendid orator, and was at his best when,
unhampered by paper, he spoke extempore and freely,
out of the abundance of his mind and heart. He was
also very happy and forcible in the use of illustrations,
which he introduced with a keen appreciation and
relish, but never employed to redundancy.

Mr. Girardeau seemed to be fond of preaching in
series, and often used that method in his pulpit minis-
trations. I recall one series of five sermons, all of which
I heard with great interest and pleasure, when he was
preaching to his negro congregation on Anson Street.
They were all founded upon a single short text, John
5:40 — "And ye will not come to Me, that ye might
have life," and were distinguished by the emphasis
placed upon the several leading words of this text —
(1) "And ye icill not come to Me"; (2) "And y^ Avill
not come to Me"; (3) "And ye will not come to J/e"/

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 139

(4) "And ye will not come to Me that ye might have
life'"; and (5) Not coming to Me ye cannot have life.
And also during his later ministry in the Glebe Street
Church, I remember that he preached series on
"Prayer" and on "Adoption," some of which I heard
and can testify that they were excellent and noble dis-
courses, always very instructive and very edifying.

Mr. Girardeau clearly stood in the front rank of the
great preachers of his day. Without doubt the three
greatest preachers ever produced by our Presbyterian
Church in South Carolina— than whom there were no
others superior— were Drs. James H. Thornwell, Ben-
jamin M. Palmer and John L. Girardeau. And I had
the rare privilege, in early life, of sitting, more or less
frequently, under the ministrations of each of these
three distinguished divines. Dr. Thornwell I regard
as facile princeps— the greatest preacher I ever heard.
His bodily presence was not imposing, his voice was
not strong or sweet, his gestures were not specially
graceful ; and his language was decidedly scholastic—
too much so for the ordinary hearer. But his clear
and sweeping logic, his profound and masterly unfold-
ing of the truth out of a rich experience of it, and his
overpowering earnestness in presenting it, impressed
me as no other preacher has ever done. Dr. Palmer
I regard as the most magnificent pulpit orator I
have ever heard. With perfect mastery of himself in
the pulpit, with a rich, deep melodious voice that
appealed at once to the ear, with graceful and appro-
priate action delightful to behold, and with profound
treatment of the great doctrines of religion in a prac-
tical and experimental way, he was superb. Dr. Girar-
deau, as I conceive, stood just between the two. He
wielded the loffic on fire of Thornwell, with much of

140 The Life Work of

the graceful oratory of Palmer; and through his long
training in preaching to negroes, he used simple and
plain language adapted to the common people. And
so, as a preacher for the masses, he was no doubt as
popular and as efficient as either of his distinguished,
admired and beloved fellow Presbyters.

The conditions in Charleston under which Mr.
Girardeau entered upon his Glebe Street pastorate
were peculiar. Our people had just emerged from a
long and desolating war in which the cause for which
they had so loyally and devotedly contended had been
lost ; multitudes of their sons had been sacrificed upon
the altar of their country, their property, for the most
part, had been destroyed, their homes in many cases
had been broken up, and their social and economical
system had been uprooted. And Charleston had been
most deeply affected in all these ways. In the early
part of the war a very destructive and extensive con-
flagration had swept across the city, destroying much
property and consuming many homes. For years the
city had been under the continual storm of shot and
shell from the enemy's batteries, which, besides the
injury to houses, public and private, made it an
unsafe habitation for its citizens who were scattered
as refugees all over the country. And now, as the
people returned to the city, it was to find themselves
impoverished, thrown out of business, upset in their
domestic arrangements, and that peculiar charm of old
Charleston, its social life, well-nigh broken up. Besides
these things, the city was subject to the galling yoke of
military rule, administered by our late adversaries,
many of whose unprincipled officers seemed to delight
in lording it over a subjugated and helpless people.
And this was followed bv the horrible and detestable

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 141

Reconstruction oppression in South Carolina, which
dragged its slimy course of corruption and fraud and
misrule and degradation of a high-toned people
throughout the whole period of Dr. Girardeau's pas-
torate of Zion Church, Glebe Street. And it was
under the constant pressure of these abnormal condi-
tions that he pursued his work.

And with what success?

Large congregations of attentive and interested
hearers filled the church regularly at its two services.
Sabbath after Sababth, despite its unfavorable situa-
tion on a short, narrow side-street. So that soon it
became necessary to enlarge the building in order to
accommodate the attendants. And this was without
any other attraction than the eloquent, earnest, faith-
ful preaching of the old Gospel, "the faith which was
once delivered to the saints." There was no display
of music; not even an organ or a set choir. Dr. Girar-
deau, like Dr. Thornwell and Dr. Adger, was con-
scientiously opposed to the use of instrumental music
in the public worship of God, and never would allow
one in the churches which he regularly served. Not
because he lacked taste for good music. He was him-
self a fine singer and often led this part of the wor-
ship in his services. But, in his opinion, the use of
instruments in the worship of God's house under the
New Testament dispensation lacked Divine authority,
and he would therefore rigidly exclude them. It will
be remembered that the first volume which he ever
issued from the press was an argument against the use
of instrumental music in public worship.

Neither had he in Glebe Street Church a trained
choir to dispense beautiful, artistic music through the
services. For a good part of the time he had a pre-

142 The Life Work of

centor, an earnest, Christian man, Avith a clear, strong,
well-trained voice, who arose after the reading of the
hymn, raised the tune, and led the singing throughout,
assisted at some times b}' cultivated vocalists.

Neither was there any reading in concert, or repeat-
ing of creeds and prayers; but only the simple, old-
time Presbyterian worship, handed down to us by our
fathers, consisting of solemn, earnest prayers led by
the minister, plain congregational singing, the impres-
sive reading of the Scripture, and the zealous, faith-
ful exposition and application of the Word, followed
by an offering for the service of the Lord. This was
the plain bill of spiritual fare which Dr. Girardeau
set before those who attended his ministry in Glebe
Street Church. But the crowds came and partook of
it, and were nourished ; and they came again ; and they
continued to come throughout his ten years' ministry
in that place.

Early in 1867, after much correspondence, and delay
through provoking obstacles thrown in the way. Dr.
Girardeau and the owners of the large Zion Church
on Calhoun Street, in which he had i^reviously
preached the Gospel to thousands of negroes, succeeded
in getting possession of their building, and he felt it
to be his duty to minister again, as far as practicable,
to his former colored flock. From the records of the
Session it appears that he was ready even to surrender
his white congregation and his work in Glebe Street,
and throw himself once more fully into the service of
the colored people. But the upshot of the matter was,
after earnest and prayerful consideration on the part
of pastor and people, an agreement that he should
give up one preaching service on the Sabbath in Glebe
Street Church so that he might be able to serve also

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 143

the colored congregation regularly in Calhoun Street
Church.

This, hoAvever, was only a temporary arrangement.
And as the negroes and whites would not now, under
the new conditions, worship together as formerly, a
little later on, at the call of the church, he secured
an assistant in the relation of a co-pastor, in order that
full services might be maintained in both churches.
The Rev. J. B. Mack, then pastor of Salem (B. R.)
Church in Sumter County, S. C, was called to this
position and was duly installed with Dr. Girardeau
as co-pastor of Zion Church, the consolidated organi-
zation, which still included both the white and col-
ored congregations. This arrangement was effected
about the end of 1867, the formal installation occur-
ring December the 29th.

But the colored flock had long been "as sheep with-
out a shepherd"; they had been sadly scattered and
torn, misled by ignorant and designing teachers, and
filled with new notions as the result of emancipation
and the changed conditions in the South. Hence,
while a goodly number — even more than we might
have expected under the circumstances — especially of
the more sober and thoughtful ones among them, were
ready to come back to their old church and remained
loyal to their former faithful and devoted pastor, and
sometimes large congregations attended the services,
yet the ante-bellum congregation could never be gath-
ered together again.

While another presents more fully this part of Dr.
Girardeau's work, I deem it proper to note its bearing
upon his Glebe Street pastorate. It was like a first,
love with him to serve these children of Africa, and
with all the burdens and the attractions and the

144 The Life AYork of

encouragements of a large and influential white city
congregation to minister unto, his heart ever yearned
/for the salvation of the negro and his development
into efficient Christian service. It is indeed pathetic
to follow the struggles which he made in this direction
as they appear in the records of the church. But he
had finally to yield to that ordering of Providence
which sundered the negroes of the South from their
former white preachers, and give his energies as pas-
tor wholly to the Glebe Street congregation.

This work among the whites continued to prosper.
Church statistics were very defective in those days,
especially as to the aggregate of communicant mem-
bership, in consequence of the unsettled condition of
our people. But the annual reports of Zion Church
show steady and considerable accessions on profession
of faith.

These came largely from the Sabbath School, of
which the pastor kept a close and continual oversight,
and which was conducted fully under the control of
the Session. This was before the days of the wide-
spread and vigorous influence and leadership of the
International Sunday School Association and the gen-
eral use, which came later, of the Uniform Lesson
System. It will therefore be interesting, no doubt, to
know the method which Dr. Girardeau and his church
employed in this important Sabbath School Avork. I
was myself, as the pastor at Spartanburg, S. C, strug-
gling with the same problems; and, always appreciat-
ing his advice, I wrote to him, asking a statement of
his plan. The following letter in reply explains it:

"You ask what our metliocl of Sabbath school instructiou is.
The best reply I can make is. by sending you the book we use.
I will mail it at the same time with this letter. It is entitled,

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 145

as you will see, 'A Key to the Shorter Catechism, etc' Besides
the excellent arranj^jement of Scripture proofs which it gives, it
presents in connection with each answer a scheme of analytical
questions which attracted my attention to it. This exercise I
regard as having great value on two accounts : First, because
a very clear and definite understanding of the answer is secured
by this means; and secondly, because the mental energies of
the pupil are exercised and developed— an end which no sort of
education, secular or spiritual, can afford to dispense with. I
have often been surprised and gratified by the evidence of its
success in this respect. The scholars are kept on the alert, the
attention is cultivated, and the mind is incited to promptness of
action. I have never seen any results equal to those which are
secured by this method. I am delighted with it. And this I
say from constant observation, for I attend the Sabbath school
regularly and take charge of the main question and the analyt-
ical exercise when the school is brought together en masse.
Indeed, one of the capital advantages of this plan is, that after
every class has separately recited, all the classes brought
together into one great class — the school itself — can be as easily
taught as each. First, I ask the girls to recite all together the
main answer, then the boys, then boys and girls at the same
time. The two sexes thus hear each other recite and the
stimulus is strong to answer correctly. Then the analytical
questions are propounded to the whole school. Then I either
ask questions extemporaneously, or address the school in refer-
ence to the lesson, endeavoring with all my might to stamp on
the scholars the main thoughts, and practically applying them
to their consciences and hearts. Oh, it is a glorious privilege
and a grand opportunity. I regard the exercise as one of the
most important and the most promising in the circle of pastoral
labors. We are trying to train the scholars as Preshyterian
Christians. For that end there is nothing like the Shorter
Catechism, and I know no form in which that Catechism can
be taught superior to this. All dryness disappears. I have
never seen scholars so intensely interested in any other mode
of Sabbath school instruction.

"The superintendent hears the recitation, in mass, of the
Scripture proofs. The whole school recites the same lesson,
except the infant class, which studies Brown's Short Catechism,

146 The Life Work of

which I consider far better than the Introduction to the Shorter
Catechism.

"Along with tile key, the school also studies the American
Sunday School Union's 'Child's Scripture Question Book,' on
the obvious principle that the historical facts of Scripture ought
to be taught as well as its doctrines. We have also a good
hymn. We select about fifty of the best hymns, and the idea is
to make the school go over them again and again until they are
so fixed in memory that the feeble faculties of the dying may
recall them.

"This is our method. Had I room and time I would like to
assign the reasons which have led to its adoption ; but I must
defer their statement until I can talk with you face to face.
Should you, however, require them before you adopt this plan,
so excellent do I regard it, that it will give me pleasure to com-
municate them. Would that our whole Church would pursue
this method ! And why not? Are not our Catechisms our inter-
pretation of the Bible? And does not this plan store the mem-
ory with the very words of Scripture in theological relations?
I cannot understand why the Church (as in the Baptismal
service) should urge upon parents the teaching of our standards
to their children, and decline to teach them herself. The family
and the Sabbath school ought to be complementary to each
other.

"We are now working five Sabbath schools, the school of my
own church, three white mission schools, and one colored. The
same method is pursued in all of them ; and there is but one
testimony from all — that it is the best method the teachers have
ever tried. It is surprising to me to hear the colored school
recite. I have never witnessed the like among them. I am dis-
posed to think that you would never regret making the experi-
ment. The books can be got in any quantity from the Carters
in New York.

"But enough! I shall tire you. May the Lord bless you in
your Sabbath school work ! The spirit of the age has substi-
tuted it for the plan of pastoral instruction of families at home
— that is, of the children by Catechism. Let us get aboard, and
take our turn at the wheel."

Another development of his work which was
specially encouraging was that the sons of Zion were

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 147

going into the Gospel ministry. During these years
no less than three business men of the congregation,
two of them married and with families to support,
heeded the call of God to preach, left their worldly
occupations, and became faithful and efficient minis-
ters of the Word. These were the Rev. Jas. E.
Fogartie, D. D., Rev. George A. Trenholm, D. D.,
both of whom were generously aided by the congrega-
tion in their preparation for the ministry, and Rev.
W. G. Vardell, who had long served as precentor of the
church. Three others, Rev. J. B. Warren, D. D., Rev.
C. E. Chichester and Rev. T. B. Trenholm, who had
been active and useful as workers in Zion Church, but
moved to other fields, later on also entered the min-
istry. All these brethren, I venture to say, drew their
inspiration and encouragement for the higher work
from their consecrated and ever zealous pastor.

Under his wise and efficient leadership, Zion Church
also engaged largely in city mission work. This was
conducted chiefly through that most practicable and
efficient means of reaching the destitute, disseminating
the truth, and laying the foundation for new churches,
the Mission Sabbath School. The regular Sabbath
School of the church, as an indispensable agency for
teaching and training the children and youth of the
congregation and as many others as could be brought
into it, enlisted the constant and earnest attention of
pastor, elders and other zealous and faithful workers.
But, besides this, four mission schools, including that
among the colored people at the Calhoun Street
Church, were organized in different parts of the city,
and conducted under the direct supervision and con-
trol of the Session, to which they regularly reported,
and which provided for their support. One of these,

148 The Life Work of

in connection with which for a time a chapel was
maintained and supplied by a regular minister, sup-
ported by this church, grew into a separate, though
never self-sustaining, church, located in the upper part
of the city.

But the interest and efforts of Dr. Girardeau and
the noble flock Avhich he led were by no means con-
fined to Charleston. As a consequence of the war, the
churches of the Presbytery had been sadly broken up
and disabled. Outside the cities of Charleston and
Columbia, in 1866 there were only three churches in
the Presbytery which had ministers to serve them
regularly. These were Orangeburg, served by the
Rev. A. F. Dickson; Walterboro, by the Rev. Edward
Palmer, and John's Island and Wadmalaw, by the
Rev. John R. Dow, who shortly afterwards also
removed to another field. This distressing condition
of the country churches and of Presbyterianism in the
low country of South Carolina, deeply moved Dr.
Girardeau's heart. And early in 1867 I was induced by
the Presbytery's committee, through the urgency of
his pathetic pleas, to remove to Charleston and under-
take the work of evangelist of Charleston Presbytery,
laboring under his constant counsel and direction as
the chairman of the Presbytery's Executive Committee
of Domestic Missions. It is impossible for me to
express my appreciation of his cordial interest, the
helpful advice and the earnest support which he ever
gave to me in this work. I continued for two
or three A^ears, until the feeble churches began to get
on their feet again; and which Dr. Girardeau ev^r
afterward contended was the saving of our weak
churches and of the cause of Presbyterianism in that
section. And it is due to him to say that this work

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 149

was made practicable only by the loyal and generous
financial suiDiDort of him and his people. The impov-
erished and disorganized little churches to which I
ministered, were too poor to sustain the evangelist or
do anything considerable for the support of his work ;
but, despite their limited means and heavy burdens,
the noble people of Zion Church contributed with
wonderful liberality, and the Session appropriated out
of their weekly Sabbath collections much the larger
part of the uncertain and indefinite salary that I
received as evangelist. At the end of every month the
Session, a fine body of intelligent, earnest men, who
faithfully co-operated with the pastor in all his efforts
for the advancement of Christ's cause, regularly
assigned one-half of all the funds taken up at the
Sunday morning services, to this work. And Dr. Girar-
deau often afterwards instanced and justified this
course as a wise measure in meeting an important
emergency in the history of our Church.

Besides this, under the inspiration of the pastor's
zeal, who himself served for several years as a faithful
and valuable member of the Assembly's Executive
Committee of Foreign Missions and Sustentation, the
church contributed liberally also to foreign missions,
education and other causes, always responding to the
calls of the General Assembly. As a more definite
statement of the church's liberality and progress at
this time, I quote from Dr. Mack's letter of resigna-
tion as co-pastor, bearing date September 24, 1869, the
following: "In less than two years a heavy debt has
been paid ; the obligations of a double work fully met,
nearly $4,000 given to missionary objects and about
160 persons added to the church. We have indeed been
wonderfully blessed ; and now, with Israel, can we say.

150 The Life Work of

'The Lord hath done great things for us, whereof we
are glad.' "

During these years Dr. Girardeau grew in the
estimation of the Church in general, as well as in the
love and appreciation of his own people. He received,
from time to time, overtures from other fields of labor ;
but he was singularly attached to his native State of
South Carolina and to his devoted people in Charles-
ton; and so he promptly rejected all such approaches.

He had, however, like other pastors, his seasons of
discouragement and depression. And his throat began
to give him some trouble and anxiety, inducing a
doubt whether he should continue in this work. And
all this assumed such form that on one occasion, in the
early summer of 1871, he felt constrained, in the face
of the vigorous opposition of the Session and the earn-
est remonstrance of the j^eople, to tender his resigna-
tion, which he pressed so urgently that the pastoral
relation was actually dissolved by the Presbytery. But
when he came to deliver his farewell discourse, the
demonstration of continued affection on the part of
the people, and their earnest desire that he should
remain as their pastor had taken such shape that he
decided at once not to leave them; and the congrega-
tion proceeded to call him again, and the Presbytery,
after a season of rest on his part, reinstated him pas-
tor without his having separated from his cherished
and devoted flock.

The record of this remarkable and unique episode
in Dr. Girardeau's pastoral experience is so interesting,
and so beautifulh^ portrays the feelings which pre-
vailed on the part of both pastor and people, that I
here insert the letter which he addressed to the con-
gregation and submitted through the Session — after

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 151

they had first pleaded with him to withdraw it and
offered him an indefinite vacation — to the congrega-
tion, and the paper which they adopted in reply :

"Charleston, June 5, 1871.
"To the Congregation of Zion Presbyterian Church.

"Beloved Brethren and Friends: With the profoundest
respect, affection and regret, I hereby tender to you my resig-
nation of my pastoral charge, and ask you to unite with me in
requesting the Presbytery to dissolve the relation existing
between us.

"The reasons which have governed me in talking this painful
step are the following :

"First, the condition of my voice and chest appears to me to
necessitate a change; and, secondly, I am convinced that a
longer continuance of my pastoral relation would not tend to
promote the growth of the congregation.

"I will not multiply words which are so easy of employment
on an occasion like this. If my past course has not persuaded,
you of my affection for you, no phrases which might now be
used would produce that impression. This, however, will I say,
that it has cost me many a tear and many a pang to come to
this decision ; and with such tears as one sheds at finally sepa-
rating from near kindred, do I pen these lines, which looks to
the severance of a union which has been and is so dear to my
heart. Only a sense of duty impels me to write them.

"I can scarcely bear the thought of parting with you— no
more to preach to you the precious gospel of Christ, no more to
mingle my prayers and praises with yours on earth, no more to
minister to you in times of affliction and distress. There is not
one of you whom I am not conscious of tenderly loving in Christ
Jesus, and I would fain believe, not one of you who does not feel
affectionately towards me.

"For Jesus' sake, dear friends, forgive me all my deficiencies
in the preaching of the gospel and in the performance of
pastoral duty among you. If you forgive them not, as I hope
my compassionate Master has, my separation from you would
indeed be a cause to me of inconsolate grief.

"Accept my heartfelt thanks for the tenderness with which
you have borne with all my defects, for the loving concessions

152 The Life Work of

which you have made to some of the views which I have advo-
cated, and with which, perhaps not all of you were able to con-
cur, and for the great kindness which you have ever evinced
for me and mine. May the Lord requite you according to His
riches in glory by Christ Jesus.

"I have no complaint to make of you — no fault to iind with
you. On the contrary, your cordial attachment to a simple and
unadulterated gospel, your Berean disposition to abide by the
Word of God as your only standard of judgment, your mis-
sionary zeal and noble spirit of liberality, have won for you the
deepest admiration of my heart. It will be for a praise and an
honor to me that I have served such a people.

"I do not ask a dissolution of the relation between us because
I have preferred another field of labor. I could not gain my
own consent to leave you so long as I feared that a change
might prove detrimental to your interests. But I trust that the
church has now arrived at that stage at which a change will
not only not injure, but promote its prosperity.

"It will cost me a bitter pang not only to part with you, but
to leave Charleston. Her very dust is dear to me. And I pray
God that if it is His blessed will, I may not be sent out of
South Carolina, but be permitted to suffer with her in her
present trials, and to contribute what labor I am capable of for
the interests of her beloved and afflicted people. But, wherever
1 may go, I shall to life's latest day bear with me the affec-
tionate remembrance of your loving kindness, and dedicate to
you a chief place in the profoundest affection of my soul.

"Returning to your hands the pastoral trust which, by your
suffrages, you reposed in me, I am, dear brethren and friends,
"Your Servant in the Glorious Gospel of Christ,

"John L. Girardeau."

This letter was duly submitted to the congregation
at a meeting called by the Session, and a committee of
five to whom it was referred, after earnest and careful
consideration, presented the following in reply, which
was adopted hj a well-nigh unanimous vote :

"The committee to which the letter of the Rev. J. L. Girar-
deau, D. D., resigning the pastoral charge of this church and
congregation and asking us to unite with him *in requesting the

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 153

Presbytery to dissolve the relation existing between us' was
referred, would respectfully submit the following report and
resolutions :

"It is impossible for your committee to describe the abso-
lutely stunning effect produced by this letter upon the congre-
gation. Some received it with unutterable amazement, some
with mute astonishment, others with tears and sobs — the out-
ward evidence of deep anguish of soul — and all, with one
accord, with the exclamation, 'No, no — tJiis cannot be; we can-
not, must not let our beloved pastor go: This intense feeling
is not confined to this congregation alone. The announcement
of the resignation of the Rev. Dr. Girardeau has sent a thrill
through this community and the entire church, and with
united voice they all cry, 'You must not let him goF

"But however deeply our feelings may be moved, let us
calmly consider the reasons assigned by our dear pastor for
this step. We quote his own language: 'The reasons which
govern me in taking this painful step are the following: First,
the condition of my voice appears to me to necessitate a change;
and secondly, I am convinced that a longer continuance of my
pastoral relation would not tend to promote the growth of the
congregation.'

"The first reason assigned is easily disposed of. It has been
a source of painful anxiety to us for some time that our pastor
was laboring beyond the limits assigned for the safe exercise
of the mental and physical powers of any man; and we look
forward to the period of repairs to our church edifice as an
opportune occasion to grant him, not only the usual summer
vacation, but a more protracted leave of absence, in the confi-
dent hope that he would return to us fully restored. But we
are willing and ready to do more, and say to him cheerfully
and in the most sincere frankness, 'Go and take a leave of
absence for six, twelve, eighteen months, or longer if necessary,
for the restoration of his physical powers ; we grant it freely.'
The second reason assigned is in these words : 'I am convinced
that a longer continuance of my pastoral relation would not
tend to promote the growth of the congregation.'

"We approach the consideration of this reason with mingled
feelings of unfeigned surprise and the most profound emotions.
What has been the history of this church since the close of the

154 The Life Work of

war? When Dr. Girardeau took charge, it was constituted of
a few fragments of two congregations, almost strangers to each
other, and so limited in pecuniary resources that they were
barely able to place the church edifice in habitable order, not
even removing the unsightly effects of the rude hand of war.
We have now but to look around to see the evidences of shot
and shell upon its defaced walls. As an evidence of its steady
and regular advance from that period, in its full organization
and equipment, as a living and working church, we appeal to
the words of our teacher and pastor. The devotion of this
little band to the principles of the pure gospel, which he has so
eloquently, earnestly and unceasingly preached to us, is but
described in his own words. He remarked in his letter, which
has just been read to you : 'I have no complaint to make of you
— no fault to find with you. On the contrary, your cordial
attachment to a simple and unadulterated gospel, your Berean
disposition to abide by the Word of God as your only standard
of judgment, your missionary zeal and noble spirit of liberality,
have won for you the deepest admiration of my heart. It will
be for a praise and an honor to me that I have served such a
people.'

"Under his ministry the church has steadily increased in
numbers, and the congregation almost outgrown the capacity of
the building. It is unnecessary to go into a detailed statement
of the various enterprises for the spread and building up of the
Master's Kingdom, which have been inaugurated and sustained,
under Providence, by his influence. Look at the evangelistic
field in the bounds of our own Presbytery. A few evenings
since, our beloved pastor stated that this congregation had con-
tributed to that work more than all the congregations in the
Presbytery put together ; besides liberal donations to all the
other benevolent operations of the Church at large. Look at
the work among the colored population in the Calhoun Street
Church, which has been almost exclusively sustained by con-
tributions from the members of this congregation. Look at the
Mission Chapel in the northwestern portion of the city, and
the flourishing Sunday school gathered there. Look at the
noble efforts of the ladies of the congregation to educate and
equip young men for the ministry. In a word — since Dr. Girar-
deau took charge of this flock, up to the termination of the last

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 155

fiscal year, this congregation tias contributed over $60,000 for
the maintenance of a preached gospel, and the various benevo-
lent and charitable enterprises of the Southern Church.

"These are the fruits of the labor and zeal under Providence
of our beloved pastor. And above all, how many souls in this
church, and throughout the region where his influence has been
felt, call him their spiritual father, and point to his preaching,
under the providence of God, as the instrument of turning them
from the broad road that leads to destruction, to that straight
and narrow way which conducts to the communion of Christ
ascended on high, and the eternal glory of the Father? We can
fully appreciate his feelings when he declares : 'It will cost me
a bitter pang, not only to part with you, but to leave Charles-
ton.' In view of these facts, not to speak of the good which he
has accomplished by those silent influences upon the young
throughout the wide circle of his acquaintance and among the
numerous strangers who seek to listen to the simple gospel of
Jesus Christ so forcibly and eloquently expounded by him, we
most solemnly and affectionately ask the question, 'How could
he have come to the conclusion that "the longer continuance of
his pastoral relation would not tend to the growth of this con-
gregation"?' We feel assured that, with restored health and a
judicious curtailment of labor, his usefulness, in this congrega-
tion and the community at large, is not at an end. In this we
are upheld by an abiding faith, and are willing to wait in the
confident expectation that, as God has given us the former rain
of the Spirit, He will also give us the latter rain in a Pente-
costal shower, which will develop a rich harvest to the glory
of that blessed Redeemer who poured out His precious blood to
save sinners from eternal death.

"We judge of the future by the past. The sun which shines
today, bright, beautiful and glorious, will rise again tomorrow ;
but it may be that his rays will be intercepted by the clouds
that surround our earth. This will be only for a season ; when
these clouds are dispersed the bright orb will again shine forth
in all his splendor and majesty. So with the Holy Spirit. He
may withhold His power for a season ; but, true to the promises
of the Divine Master, He will pour out His resistless influences
to the salvation of sinners and the glory of God.

156 The Life Work of

"The committee would submit the following resolutions for
the consideration of the congregation, and resx^ectfully recom-
mend their adoption :

''Resolved, First, That we have received the letter of resigna-
tion of our beloved pastor, the Rev. J. L. Girardeau, D. D., with
unfeigned surprise and profound sorrow, and cannot bring our-
selves to believe that Providence designs to take him from us.

''Resolved, Second, That we as a Church and congregation
fully and affectionately reciprocate the kind feelings of confi-
dence and regard so touchingly expressed in his letter, and
deeply sympathise with him in this the hour of his affliction
and trial, and pray that God in His wisdom and mercy may
restore him to health, and point out to him clearly the path of
duty and usefulness.

"Resolved, Third, That we cordially tender to him a leave of
absence from pastoral labor for such a length of time as may be
necessary for the restoration of his health. We cannot, how-
ever, obtain our consent voluntarily to unite with him 'in
requesting the i:'resbytery to dissolve the relation existing
between us' ; but as we claim to be true Presbyterians — willing
to abide by the Constitution and Standards of our Church — we
will consent that the subject be placed before Presbytery, and
if that body accedes to the request of our pastor, we shall be
constrained to submit to the decision, however painful it
may be.

"Respectfully submitted,

"F. M. Robertson, Chairman."

After this very imiisiial episode which so severely
tested and strikingly brought out the relations exist-
ing between pastor and people, Dr. Girardeau, con-
senting to the re-establishment of the pastoral relation,
took a much needed rest, while the church building
was undergoing repairs and his people were scattered
on account of the prevalence of yellow fever in
Charleston. But in the autumn he resumed his regu-
lar ministrations in Zion Church, took up again the
important mission work which had before been inaug-
urated, and continued to prosecute his pastoral duties

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 157

with his accustomed zeal and efficiency. It has been
very interesting to note, in searching the records of
this church, how wide and thorough was the work
done by this noble congregation under the faithful
leadership of this able pastor. The preaching ser-
vices were faithfully conducted and well attended. The
Sabbath School was carefully looked after in its organ-
ization and its instruction. The women were organ-
ized into societies which did efficient service. The
missions were maintained and diligently worked.
Infants in large numbers were baptized, and discipline
was not neglected. And the blessing of the Lord
seemed to rest continually upon the work.

But at the General Assembly of 1875 in St. Louis,
Mo., the Columbia Theological Seminary being then
under the control of the Assembly, which elected the
Directors and the Professors, Dr. Girardeau was
unanimously chosen, against his earnest protest, to the
chair of Didactic and Polemic Theology in that insti-
tution, just vacated by the venerable Dr. William S.
Plumer, who had been transferred to the chair of Pas-
toral, Casuistic and Historic Theology. Dr. Girar-
deau, however, in his humble estimate of himself,
seriously discounted his qualifications for the high and
responsible position, and promptly declined it. At
the next meeting of the Synod of South Carolina, the
Rev. Dr. J. O. Lindsay, on behalf of the Board of
Directors of the Seminary, requested the Synod to
unite with the Board in urging Dr. Girardeau to with-
draw his declination and accept the place, which the
Synod did by a hearty, rising vote. But Dr. Girar-
deau still persisted in declining. I well remember a
private interview Avhich Dr. J. L. Martin, then pastor
of the Abbeville Church, and I had with him,

158 The Life AVork of

in which we zealously pleaded with him to yield to
the judgment of his brethren, so clearly, strongly and
repeatedly expressed, and accept. Dr. Girardeau
while held a prisoner on Johnson's Island so long,
had taught a class of ministers and theological stu-
dents with such marked ability and success that the
report of this work had gone abroad throughout the
Church, and the conviction that he had, in an eminent
degree, the qualifications of mind and heart and per-
son and culture to fill this chair and take up the work
laid down by the illustrious Dr. Thornwell at his pre-
mature decease. Besides, his continuance in the pulpit,
with the excessive demands upon his voice seemed pre-
carious. And the Seminary, through a recent dis-
turbance, had lost two of its distinguished professors,
Drs. John B. Adger and Jos. R. Wilson, so that its con-
dition was such as to cause its friends serious anxiety.
Thus all eyes seemed to turn to Dr. Girardeau, and
many hearts were set upon him as the man, put by
Divine Providence in the hands of the Church, to take
up the leading professorship in the institution and
lift it out of its depressed condition. Hence the pres-
sure which we brought to bear upon him. But while
he would not give us an affirmative answer at York-
ville, where the Synod was convened, a few weeks'
later he wrote to me as Stated Clerk of the S^mod. sig-
nifying his accession to the expressed wishes of his
brethren and his acceptance of the professorship, pro-
vided the Board of Directors, after considering a state-
ment of his views on certain questions which had
arisen in the late disturbance in the Seminary, still
urged his going. The statement referred to, which it
is not necessary here to record, was duly laid before
the Board, and with hearty unanimity they continued

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 159

to urge his acceptance. Accordingly, he again ten-
dered his resignation as pastor of Zion Church, which
this time, in view of the peculiar circumstances of the
situation, reluctantly yielded to his request, and the
Presbytery finally dissolved the pastoral relation.

In order to show that there was no cause in the
church itself for the sundering of this relation, that
the work was still progressing prosperously, and that
the same old feeling of affectionate devotion prevailed
to the end between pastor and people, I here once
more copy Dr. Girardeau's letter requesting that the
church concur in his release, and the reply of the Ses-
sion, which was endorsed by a meeting of the congre-
gation. Both are worthy of careful consideration and
hearty admiration:

"Charleston, December 20tb, 1875.
"To the Congregation of Zion Presbyterian Church.

Beloved Brethren and Friends : It is known to you that the
General Assembly of our Church, which sat last May in the
City of St. Louis, elected me Professor of Didactic and Polemic
Theology in the Seminary at Columbia. The call was one which
I found it difficult to resist, but I deemed it my duty to decline
compliance with it. The Board of Directors of the Seminary,
at their stated meeting in the fall, requested me to withdraw
the letter to the Assembly in which I declined the professorship,
and to accept the position. With that request, also, I thought
it my duty to decline compliance. Subsequently the Synod of
South Carolina urged me to reconsider the question and accept
the position to which I had been called by the Assembly. In
that action the Synod of Georgia concurred. This persistent
pressure of the question upon me by the courts of the Church,
impressed me, and I was led to the conclusion that if I could
consistently with the course I have pursued with reference to
some events which had occurred in connection with the Semi-
nary, obey the voice of the Church, I ought to do so. Accord-
ingly I addressed a communication to the Board of Directors of
the Theological Seminary, containing a frank exposition of my

160 The Life Work of

views, accompanied by the remark that if, with the statement
before them, the board should deem it inexpedient that I should
go to the Seminary, the matter would be dropped ; but if, on
the other hand, they should judge that it was expedient for me
to go, I would withdraw my letter of declination. The action
of the board at its late meeting was unanimous and hearty in
favor of my going to the Seminary, and I accordingly stand
pledged to take such steps as contemplate a dissolution of my
pastoral relation and my entrance upon the duties of the pro-
fessorship. I, therefore, respectfully request that you will unite
with me in asking Charleston Presbytery to dissolve the pas-
toral relation now subsisting between us.

"A little more than four years ago I deemed it my duty to
make a similar request, but it pleased Providence to order that
I should not then depart from you. I would now, with new
emphasis, express the feelings to which I gave utterance on
that occasion. Your affectionate and generous conduct towards
me has increased my obligations to you, and bound my heart to
you more closely than ever. I am profoundly grateful to you
for all your kindness ; I love you tenderly and deeply ; and only
a conviction of duty impels me to take this painful step. We
are poor, blind creatures — liable to err. But I have sincerely
prayed for guidance; and the construction which I have been
led to place on providential indications in the case makes me
feel that I ought to go. I have pleaded with the Church, I
have pleaded with God, that I might not be sent to Columbia.
The call, however, has been repeated again and again, and in
such a way as to create the fear that I might be found to fight
against Providence by refusing to go. I flatter myself that you
are reluctant to part the bond which unites us. So am I. Were
such the will of the Lord, gladly would I stay with you ; but
He seems to order otherwise, and I beg you to acquiesce in the
action of the upper courts of the Church.

"Praying that the Holy Spirit may direct you in this matter,
and that grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and the
Lord Jesus Christ may be multiplied abundantly unto you, I
am, my dear brethren and friends,

"Your unworthy brother and servant in Jesus,

"John L. Girardeau."

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 161

To this letter, 23resented at a meeting of the congre-
gation on December 27, 1875, the following preamble
and resolutions presented by Dr. F. M. Robertson, were
unanimously adopted in response:

"The ordeal through which this church has been called to
pass impresses upon us a lesson which can never be forgotten,
and which should not be permitted to pass by without an
appropriate recognition and record of the deep feeling which
has moved the entire congregation. From the moment the
remarkable proceedings of the General Assembly of our Church,
at its meeting in the City of St. Louis in May last, calling our
beloved pastor, with an almost unprecedented unanimity and
emphasis, to fill a vacant chair in the Theological Seminary in
Columbia, S. C, was made known to us, our hearts have been
alternately agitated with fear and hope.

"If the question of his acceptance of the position had been
submitted to this church and congregation, no doubt the answer
would have been an emphatic unwillingness to part with him.
And it was a sad trial for us to refrain from entering a direct
plea in behalf of the little flock in Glebe street, who felt that
the removal of their gifted, able, eloquent and beloved pastor
would have tested the grace of acquiescence in the wishes of
the General Assembly, the highest court of our Church, to the
last degree.

"The possibility of the severence of our relation as pastor
and flock has now and then been presented to us, but our
answer has been uniformly the same, 'We desire no change.'
Our attachment to him has grown with each rolling year. We
have earnestly prayed that the day of our separation as pastor
and people might be far, far distant, and that our Divine Mas-
ter would strengthen the cords, and more firmly cement the
bonds of our union, and enable us to add fresh proof from year
to year of our heartfelt devotion to him.

"But an All-wise Providence has directed that he should be
transferred to another sphere of labor in the vineyard of the
Lord. He tells us, in his letter to the congregation, that the
reiterated, unanimous and cordial calls from the General Assem-
bly, Board of Directors of the Theological Seminary, and the
Synods of South Carolina and Georgia appeal to him in such a

162 The Life Work of

manner as to force upon him the conviction that it would be
flying in the face of Providence to refuse to comply. In his
letter to the Board of Directors of the Theological Seminary he
states, 'Among the moral reasons which have influenced me,
unwillingness to give up my present field of labor did not have
a place. It would indeed be a great wrench to my feelings to
be obliged to leave my people, who have always treated me so
generously and affectionately, but I admitted the power of the
Assembly to order the transfer.'

"Under these circumstances it becomes us to pause before
we adopt such a course as may embarrass him in following
what he considers the path of paramount duty. It is unfortu-
nately true that the very idea of our separation awakens
gloomy forebodings in the minds of many as to the future of
our church. But let us remember, beloved friends, this is
God's church. He who has watched over us in the past, and
used us, as we humbly trust, as instruments to extend His
kingdom, and for the promotion of His glory, will sustain us
in the future. Paul may plant and Apollos water, but God
alone can give the increase. Let us present a united and har-
monious front. With an unwavering faith let us be true to
God's Church, and be assured He will be true to us. Our mis-
sion as a church and congregation is not a mere declaration of
words. No, no. Let us show our faith by our works. Look
around. Even within the bounds of our own Presbytery, and
particularly on the seaboard, behold prostrate churches and
souls starving for the want of heavenly bread. Let us hold
together; cry to the Master for help; redouble our efforts to
resuscitate these prostrate churches and send a pure gospel to
the destitude.

"1. Resolved, That it is with the most unfeigned regret and
sorrow that we have received the letter of our beloved pastor,
the Rev. J. L. Girardeau, D. D., in which, under the pressure
of Providential indications, he has felt it to be his duty to
accept a call to a vacant chair in the Theological Seminary, and
tender his resignation as pastor of this church.

"2. Resolved, That after a calm and prayerful consideration
of the correspondence between the directors of the Theological
Seminary and the Rev. Dr. Girardeau, and a careful review of
his letter to this congregation, we feel reluctantly constrained

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 163

to unite with him in asking the Charleston Presbytery to dis-
solve the pastoral relations now existing between us.

"3. Resolved, That the session of this church be requested
to ask the Rev. Dr. Girardeau, if not inconsistent with his other
duties, to supply the pulpit of this church until the 1st of
April next, when our fiscal year will terminate, and to earn-
estly urge him to comply with this request.

"4. Resolved, That an authenticated copy of the foregoing
preamble and resolutions be forwarded to Charleston Presby-
tery, through the representative of this church to that body.
Also that a copy be handed to the Rev. Dr. Girardeau.

"5. Resolved, That the action of this meeting touching the
resignation of the Rev. Dr. Girardeau of his pastoral charge
of this church and congregation be published in the Southern
Preshyterian, and that the Session be requested to have the
same spread upon the Sessional Records of this church."

The Charleston Presbytery shortly afterwards, at
a pro-ac-rata meeting, dissolved the pastoral relation;
and while Dr. Girardeau, in compliance with the
request of the congregation, continued to supply the
pulpit for several months, he promptly removed to
Columbia and took up the work in the Theological
Seminary. And thus terminated his happy and suc-
cessful pastorate of ten years in Zion Church, Glebe
Street.

CHAPTER VI

THE SEMINARY PROFESSOR

By W. T. Hall, D. D.

Columbia Seminary, known at the present time
technically as "The Theological Seminary of South
Carolina, Georgia, Alabama and Florida," was
founded in 1828 by the Synod of South Carolina and
Georgia. For a 3^ear or two it was conducted at Liv-
ingston, Georgia, the Rev. Thomas Goulding, D. D.,
being the only professor. In 1830 it was transferred
to Columbia, South Carolina, and in 1831 to its present
eligible site on Blanding Street. In chronological order
it was the eighth strictly theological seminary estab-
lished in the United States. The first was established
in Beaver County, Pennsylvania, in 1793, by the Asso-
ciate Presbyterian Church of North America ; the sec-
ond, by the Associate Reformed Church, in New York,
in 1804; the third was Andover, in 1806; the fourth
New Brunswick, in 1810; the fifth Princeton, in 1811;
the sixth Union Seminary in Virginia, in 1824; the
seventh the Associate Reformed Seminary at Alle-
ghany, Pennsylvania. It thus appears that our branch
of the Reformed Church was not the first to begin the
work in this country of erecting strictly theological
schools for the regular training of ministers of religion,
and that it was not content to combine its resources on
a single great institution at some suitable locality.
The idea underlying the policy adopted b}^ our fathers
was the importance of educating candidates for the
ministry at home. It was thought that the number of

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 165

candidates would be increased by having seminaries of
sacred learning distributed over the territory at suit-
able intervals; that the candidates would be better
adapted to the work in the home field; and that dif-
ferent sections of the Church would have an equal
chance to secure a supply of laborers. The records of
the Synod of South Carolina and Georgia show that
all these considerations operated on the minds of the
founders of Columbia Seminary. And a survey of the
work done by the Seminary in aiding to plant and
develop our Church in the tier of States from South
Carolina to Texas abundantly vindicates the wisdom
of its founders. At the semi-centennial of the Sem-
inary, celebrated in 1881, the Rev. George Howe, D. D.,
L.L. D., who gave his whole life to the service of the
institution, made the following statement, which illus-
trates the point : "More than three-fourths of the min-
isters and licentiates of the Synod of South Carolina,
more than half of those of the Synod of Georgia,
about one-third of those of the Synod of Alabama and
Arkansas, nearly one-half of the Synods of Memphis
and Mississippi were students of this Seminary." It
should not, however, be inferred that the founders of
the Seminary had in view only the benefit of these
extreme Southern States. They recognized the fact
that the field is the world, and planted the institution
with reference to every department of Church work.
More than seven hundred ministers have been trained
for their work in her classrooms; and have gone forth
to adorn the pulpit and the press, to preside over insti-
tutions of learning, to fill the chairs of theological sem-
inaries, and to take a leading part in evangelizing
the world. Particularly has the service of her sons
been conspicuous in the great work of foreign missions

166 The Life Work of

and in the efforts to evangelise the colored population
in our Southern country. How could it be otherwise
with John Leighton Wilson and John L. Girardeau
among her alumni ?

Dr. Girardeau w^s elected Professor of Didactic and
Polemic Theology in 1875. He was the sixth in the
line of eminent theologians who had been called suc-
cessively to this responsible position — including Dr.
Goulding at the beginning, and Dr. Palmer for a year
or two during the War between the States. We may
refer again to the historical discourse of Dr. Howe for
a glimpse of several of these distinguished men. "And
now the forms of my own associates of the faculty
pass before me — of Dr. Goulding, my first colleague,
who, as he sometimes humorously said to me, 'was the
first native of Georgia that became a Presbyterian
minister since the foundation of the world'; and who
served the Church faithfully in this office for six years ;
of Dr. A. W. Leland, of commanding person and high
native endowments, who served the Seminary as pro-
fessor first of theology, and then of rhetoric and pas-
toral theology, for thirty-one years, till disabled by
disease; of the matchless J. H. Thornwell, D. D.,
L.L. D.. professor for six years of Didactic and
Polemic Theology, called away, alas! too soon for us,
to the skies; and to these brethren so dear to us, we
have to add another, nomen clarum et venerahile\ Wil-
liam S. Plumer, D. D., L.L. D., whom our Lord and
Master has called home to himself from a life of great
usefulness and unremitted toil."

During the war the Seminary, with the consent of
the Synods then owning it, passed under the control
of the General Assembly of the Southern Presbyterian
Church, and so continued until after the date of Dr.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 167

Girardeau's election. Thus it happened that he was
called to service in the Seminary by the voice of the
whole Church, expressed through the commissioners to
the Assembly. The election was held by the Assembly
during its sessions in the City of St. Louis in 1875.
The nomination was made by the Rev. Dr. Palmer, of
New Orleans, in a memorable speech. He had known
Dr. Girardeau from a child. They were both born in
or near the City of Charleston, and were both trained
at Columbia Seminary. For many years they were
associated as members of the Synod of South Carolina.
Dr. Palmer also had full knowledge of the needs of the
Seminary. He had known the institution through all
its troubled history and had been twice a member of
its faculty. Perhaps he never felt greater satisfaction
in any event which he had a hand in shaping than in
the call of his friend to the chair of theology. It did
not require, however, much eloquent speech to move
and guide the Assembly on the occasion. The atten-
tion of the friends of the Seminary had been directed
to Dr. Girardeau for years as the proper successor to
the lamented Dr. Thornwell. They recognized in him
a man of deep piety, scholarly tastes, large attain-
ments and national reputation as a preacher. No other
man of his age in all the Church combined so many
admirable qualities. He was known to be in full sym-
pathy with all that distinguished the Southern Church
from other Presbyterian bodies. He had become
famous as a preacher to the negroes in Charleston, and
spent his life in their service, notwithstanding his
devotion to the principles for which the Confederate
Government contended to the bitter end. It is hardly
necessary to say that his election was hearty and unan-
imous; and that it gave great satisfaction to all the

16S The Life Work of

friends and alumni of the Seminary. The right man
had been found at last.

But what appeared so clear to the minds of all the
other alumni and friends of the Seminary was a source
of anxious thought and great embarrassment to Dr.
Girardeau himself. At a meeting of the Board of
Directors in September, 1875, the following resolution
was adopted :

"That the Chairman of the Board write to Rev.
J. L. Girardeau, D. D., and state to him that this
Board regrets that he has declined to accept the pro-
fessorship tendered to him by the Assembly, and
requests him to reconsider the matter; and, if he can
see his way clear to do so, that he will yet accept the
appointment."

In reply to this communication from the Board,
Dr. Girardeau made the following answer :

"Dear Brethren : The Synod of South Carolina, at the late
meeting, the Synod of Georgia having subsequently concurred,
urged me to withdraw the letter to the Moderator of the Gen-
eral Assembly, in which I had declined to take the chair of
Theology in the Seminary at Columbia. In earnestly endeavor-
ing to dissuade the Synod from adopting that action, I pressed
one reason, although there were others which had been prom-
inent and obtrusive against my assuming the responsibility of
the professorship. I afterwards regretted that I did not give
a fuller disclosure of my difficulties, but the proposition took
me by surprise, and on the spur of the moment I presented the
great reason which appeared to my mind sufiicient of itself to
oppose my acceptance of the chair. The action of the Synod
over my protest, I am constrained to confess, deeply affected
me. The fact that it was taken by a body which knew me
well, and which I greatly loved and honored, and that a ques-
tion already once decided against, imposing sanctions was
again urged upon me with a persistency I could not account
for, both humbled and impressed me. I felt that I was called

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 169

on to reconsider the decision whicli had been rendered. Having
done so, I now beg to lay before you for your consideration the
result which has been reached. I have been extremely reluct-
ant to submit the case in such a form as supposes a meeting
of the board, but I am shut up either to take that course or
else absolutely to decline. And I am compelled to address this
communication to the board and not to the Synod, because the
latter body will not meet again until late in next year, and it
is practicable for the former to convene at any time. The
propriety of invoking the action of the board, moreover, is .i"s-
tified by the consideration that they represented different Synods,
and that they are the immediate curators of the Seminary.
This, I beg, may be accepted as my excuse for subjecting the
members of the board to the inconvenience of a special meet-
ing, should one be deemed necessary.

"Circumstances render it proper and desirable that I should,
at this stage of the matter, frankly expose to you, brethren of
the board, the past and present posture of my mind in relation
to it. This I will attempt to do with as much brevity as will
consist with clearness. The reasons which have hitherto oper-
ated upon me have been of two sorts — one the matter of which
was intellectual, and the other the matter of which was moral.
In the first place, I was conscious of an inadequate furniture
of scholarship and learning for the discharge of the duties of
a chair which had been adorned by erudition as well as illus-
trated by genius. It was not so much a question of capacity,
even though I could lay no claim to such a measure of it as
the requirements of the chair demand. Upon that point my
brethren had possessed the means of judging, and, if they
thought me suited to be in some measure profitable to the
Church in that respect, I was prepared to defer to their judg-
ment. But it was a question of attainment which oppressed
me and my own convictions as to that point sustained me in
declining the position. Since the fresh and urgent pressure of
the matter upon me by the Synod of South Carolina, with the
concurrence of the Synod of Georgia, I have been led, somewhat
to my own surprise, to take the view that the responsibility is
lifted from me and assumed by the Church. I faithfully sub-
mitted the difliculty and it has been overruled. That reason,
therefore, though still keenly felt, I now consent to waive.

170 The Life Work of

"In the second place, among the moral reasons which have
influenced me, unwilling to give up my present field of labor
did not have a place. It would indeed be a great wrench to my
feelings to be obliged to leave my beloved people, who have
always treated me so generously and affectionately, but I
admitted the power of the Assembly to make the transfer.
Those reasons were the following : 1. There were certain private
difficulties in the way of my acceptance which appeared to me
to contribute to the justification of a declination. That reason,
also, although not without great reluctance, I now relinquish.
2. I had received positive information that an impression
existed, previously to my election by the Assembly, that I
aspired to the Theological chair at Columbia, and also that in
certain quarters a belief was entertained that there was a plan
on the part of others which contemplated my being ultimately
placed in it. In regard to the former I was innocent, and as
to the latter I was ignorant. If any such plan existed I was
unacquainted with it. It is plain that had I complied with the
call of the Assembly those suppositions never could have been
rebutted. Now, however, in consequence of my having declined,
they must be exploded. That reason, therefore, is no longer
operative. 3. I had made common cause with the brethren who
have retired from the Seminary in contending for the principle
of obedience to law on the part of theological students. In
that contest we were defeated. Hence a two-fold difficulty
arose. How could I consistently go into an institution in which
the principle to which we had borne testimony had been pros-
trated? And how could I, by going in, appear to desert my
friends who were out precisely on that issue? Fidelity alike to
principle and to friendship seemed to rise up and dispute my
passage to the Seminary. Nor could these things be easily
separated, for the principle of obedience to constitutional law
appeared to be incarnated in my friends as living representa-
tives of it, and representatives in defeat. It is this difficulty
which, since the solution of others, has emerged into promi-
nence and occasioned my delay in responding to the request of
the Synod. It is true the last Assembly in electing to a chair in
the Seminary one who was known to have stood for the princi-
ple to which allusion has been made, seemed to give it a practi-
cal endorsement; but the concession was virtual, not explicit,

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 171

and nothing was said or done beyond an implicit approval
which directly relieved the position of the brethren who retired
from the Seminary. Fidelity to friendship, then, and obedience
to the call of the church confronted each other. If they could
in no way be reconciled, I felt that I must yield to the claims
of the former and decline compliance with the call of the
Church as incorrectly addressed to one under such circum-
stances. Since it is obvious that the Church cannot legitimately
call an individual to violate fundamental obligations enforce<l
alike by nature and the word of God. The question, then, was
narrowed down to this : Would my going to the Seminary be
fairly interpretable as an abandonment of the cause which was
common to me with my friends, and to an abandonment of
them? Now the cause was common to them and me in so far
as the contest for the maintenance of the principle of obedi-
ence to law was concerned. If, then, my giong into the Sem-
inary would imply my relinquishment, or even compromise, of
that principle, I could not go. Conscience and honor would
bar its gates to me.

"If, therefore, I go into the Seminary, it can only be under
this distinct understanding: that I regard the action of the
Assembly of 1875 as an endorsement of the principle in ques-
tion, and as consequently opening the way for one who main-
tained it to enter the institution, and also as virtually sustain-
ing the retired professor in so far as their maintenance of ths>t
principle was concerned ; that I still uphold that principle and
would feel bound on any future occasion of its being chal-
lenged to give it my support; that I cannot consent to be con-
strued as a sort of embodied compromise measure with neutral
aspect toward opposite and conflicting principles; that it is
my opinion that the utterance of the Church in her supreme
court ought to have been definitely given in favor of the great
principle of obedience to law and legitimate authority. What-
ever view may have been expressed as to the expediency or
inexpediency in the first instance of a particular measure
which gave rise to the issue between that principle and the
will of the students; that to the brethren who have retired
from the Seminary ought to have been saved from that position
of apparent humiliation in which they have been placed, but
in which they must be consoled by the reflection that they are

172 The Life Work of

vindicated by truth, and that the injustice which I conceive
they have suffered ought to be removed by some explicit utter-
ance of the General Assembly.

"At the same time I beg to say that should I go, it would not
be in any belligerent or disputatious spirit, but with the pur-
pose to refrain from agitating the facts or rekindling the pas-
sions of the past, and to endeavor, so far as in me lies, to act
kindly, cautiously and fraternally toward all my colleagues,
and with the hope that it may please the Lord Jesus to use me
as an instrument for healing divisions, and so far contributing
to the advancement of the Seminary and the interest of our
beloved Zion.

"I lay before you, brethren of the board, this plain declara-
tion of my views, and very respectfully crave your judgment in
the case. If in the light of this statement you deem it inexpe-
dient that I should go into the Seminary, an intimation from
you to that effect will be all that is necessary. I will, in that
event, allow my letter of declination to remain in the hands of
the Moderator of the Assembly. If, on the other hand, with
this statement before you, it still be your judgment, given
unanimously, that I ought to go into the institution, I will
withdraw that letter. In that case, as the Seminary has been
in session for some time, I will submit to your will as to the
question when I should enter upon the duties of the chair,
whether during the present term or at the commencement of
the next.

"I deem it required, by the allusions which have been made
in this letter to Dr. Wilson and Dr. Adger, and by justice to
them, to say that the former emphatically expressed his wish
that I should go to the Seminary by the motion which he
offered as to the form of the vote at my election, and that the
latter has requested me to throw out of the account my personal
relations to himself, and has expressed a strong desire that I
snould accept the professorship.

"I should be greatly pained if the impression should in the
least degree be made upon your minds that I have written in
any spirit of arrogance. Very far from it. I am too deeply
sensible of the honor conferred upon me and the confidence
reposed in me by my brethren, as well as my unworthiness and
weakness; have been too profoundly exercised in regard to a

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 173

question at once so critical to me, and so closely related to the
interests of the Church, to have been governed by any other
feeling than one of humility.

"I come to you with the humble and earnest prayer that the
Lord may reveal his will through the action which your wisdom
may suggest.

"Permit me in conclusion to ask that you will do me the
favor, when you shall have acted upon this communication, to
give it publicity.

"I am, dear brethren, with high esteem,

"Very truly yours,

"John L. Girardeau."

On this communication the Board took the following
action :

"1. That it sees nothing in the views expressed in
the letter inconsistent with Dr. Girardeau's accepting
the position in the Seminary to which he has been
called.

"2. That this Board unanimously and most heartily
repeats the call of the Assembly and the Synods of
South Carolina and Georgia and the Board to Dr.
Girardeau to accept the chair thus proffered to him."

Dr. Girardeau's notes show the spirit with which
he entered his Avork, and the methods used by him.

"I entered upon the discharge of my duties here
January 18th, 1876. I was, previously to my first
lecture, anxious almost to sickness. I could not endure
the thought of undertaking an office for which my
furniture was consciously so inadequate. But the Lord
helped me. I was enabled to speak with freedom in
my first attempt, with the senior class, on the Dispo-
sitions proper to the study of Theology. And I have
been helped since. I commit myself and this work to
which I did not call myself, to the Almighty, faithful

174 The Life Work of

hands of the Lord Jesus. Glorious Saviour ! I adore,
I admire, I love Thee ! Use me to show forth Thy
matchless beauty, loveliness and glory ! Enrich me
with all knowledge and utterance, for Thy name's
sake. Amen. J. L. G."

"First Meeting With Senior Class.
"I. The Text Book to be used.

"Choice lies between Calvin and Hodge.
"Reasons for electing the latter.
"II. Get Calvin, and get him as well in the original as in the
translation.
"Read him daily, in the original — if only a brief passage.
"On the topic for study the translation may be used,

parallel with Hodge.
"Get Hill also. Lectures in Divinity. Comparative The-
ology.
"Read Thornwell's Second Volume. Masterly discussion.
Turettin.
"III. Methods.

"1. Recitation upon text-book.

"2. Interrogation.

"3. Lectures — unwritten and written.

"4. Written analyses of each day's exercise."

"Preliminary Remarks.

"1. Relation between the instructor and the students.

"2. Free interrogation by the class. Free discussion under
limitations. (1) Must not be captious. (2) Must not be to
cover want of preparation, or to consume time. (3) Must be
respectful.

"3. My advice to you is, that, ordinarily, you do not pursue
the plan of taking notes of the remarks made by the professor ;
except in the case of definitions, leading divisions, and state-
ments written on the blackboard.

"1. The practice will prove injurious to your training as
extemporaneous preachers. The opposite practice beneficial.

"2. Injurious, also to your training as debaters and speakers.

"3. Hurtful to the memory. The bearing upon attention.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 175

"4. Less stimulating to the teacher, especially when lecturing.

"5. You are not training to be expert reporters.

"6. Illustration derived from my listening to Thornwell and
Palmer.

"7. This counsel is given only in regard to my own chair.
Each professor must determine for himself concerning this mat-
ter. So, likewise, must, to some extent, each student.

"8. After each recitation write out scheme as far as possible.
The diflBculties may be great, but success will be all the greater,

"9. Analyses in writing, after every recitation, in alphabetical
order."

"The Dispositions Proper to the Study of Theology.
"I. In the general, those which spring from conversion.
"II. The love of Truth.

"This will induce zeal and industry in its pursuit.
*'III. Neutrality of mind.
"What?

"1. Indifference as to what shall prove to be the truth
as between conflicting views.
"Not indifference to the truth itself.
"2. Great law: Evidence is the measure of assent.
"3. The holding of previous judgments, however
derived, except from thorough-going, independent
investigation, as tentative. The weight to be
attached to early instructions. Venerable pre-
sumptions, which are to be held until rebutted by
competent evidence.
"IV. Humble dependence upon the Holy Spirit.
"V. Implicit submission to the dogmatic authority of God's
Word."

"The Methods of Study.
"I. Analysis and synthesis.
"II. Regard for the drift of a particular context.
"III. Regard for the analogy of the whole — 'the proportion of
faith.' "

History teaches that several conditions must meet
in order to the production of a great theologian. Chief
among these are extraordinary endowments, both nat-

176 The Life Work of

ural and gracious; prolonged occupation as a profes-
sional instructor, and the stimulus of some absorbing
religious crisis. This statement might be illustrated
by referring to Calvin and Chalmers, or to Hodge,
Dabney and Thornwell in our own country. The first
and third of these conditions met in the case of Dr.
Girardeau, but the second was, in a measure, absent.
He entered the Seminary, as a teacher, in January,
1876, and retired voluntarily, as he began to feel the
burden of years, in May, 1895. Time enough was
allowed to form an acquaintance with the broad field
of theology and its kindred sciences, but not for form-
ulating the result in a systematic treatise. His pen
was not idle, as we shall see further on, but his pub-
lished works are critical rather than constructive. In
adopting this policy he was wise. Dr. Charles Hodge
began to teach in Princeton Seminary in the year 1822,
but his "Systematic Theology" was not written until
about 1870. Dr. Dabney and Dr. Thornwell both
began their labors as instructors a few years after they
were ordained as ministers. Dr. Dabney lived to a
good old age and j^reserved his vigor to the last. Con-
sequently we have a sense of completeness when we
read his works. Dr. Thornwell was cut off in his
fiftieth year, when his work was but half finished.
There is perhaps some advantage in having in the
chair of Theology a man who has had considerable
experience in the pastoral office, but it is a question
worth considering whether the gain would not be
greater if the incumbent was allowed to give his whole
life to the work of teaching. But, to return to the
subject of this sketch, nor are we left in doubt as to
the type of theology he taught, by the absence of a
systematic treatise on the subject. The text-books he

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 177

used, his "Discussions of Theological Questions," and
the statements of those who studied under him furnish
ample evidence that he emphasized the Federal theo-
logy. By this we mean the Reformed Theology cast
in the mould of the covenants. This will indicate with
sufficient distinctness his devotion to the Westminster
Confession of Faith and Catechisms, as they contain
the only Creed that teaches the doctrines of the Cove-
nants. But the question remains as to the extent of
the influence the federal principle is to be allowed to
exercise in the interpretation of these standards. For-
tunately for us, he has spoken his mind on this ques-
tion deliberately and freely. At the semi-centennial of
Columbia Seminary he delivered a carefully prepared
address on "The Federal Theology: Its Import and
Its Regulative Influence." He had been teaching
theology in the Seminary about six years, and he prob-
ably made use of the occasion to indicate his position
as a theologian. As our purpose in this sketch is to
allow Dr. Girardeau to state his own views, we will
quote freely from this address. It opens with the fol-
lowing brief history of the origin of the federal theo-
logy : "It has become almost an adage, that the Church
has developed her theology mainly through conflict
with error. This must be so from the nature of the
case. Attention is not apt to be specially directed to
what is undisputed, and our clearest judgments are
delivered from comparison. The contrast of truth and
error, induced by the assertion of the latter, enhances
our comprehension of both. The doctrine of the cove-
nants constitutes no exception to this law. It was not
brought distinctly under investigation and formally
developed until the period succeeding the Reformation.
Luther grandly elucidated the cardinal doctrine of

178 The Life Work of

justification by faith alone. Justification he saw
clearly. Imputation he perceived less distinctly: and
he stopi^ed short of the controlling principle of federal
representation. Even Calvin, magnificently endowed
as he was by his abilities and learning for a systematic
treatment of revealed truth, although he produced a
theological work distinguished for its comprehensive
grasp of the doctrines of religion in their relation to
each other, did not seem to haA^e had his mind defi-
nitely tuned to the federal scheme.

"It was when Placaeus broached his theory of the
mediate imputation of Adam's sin that the attention
of the Reformed Church was thoroughly aroused to
the importance and scope of the federal theology. The
theologians of the Dutch School, in their massive
works, subjected it to a full, if not exhaustive, consid-
eration; and their example was followed by some of
the most illustrious divines of England and Scotland."

He next considers the import of the Federal Theo-
logy. In this inquiry he begins with the Covenant of
Grace, "for the reason that its existence and the opera-
tion of the representative principle in connexion with
it are more clearly and explicitly set forth in the
Scriptures than are the fact of the Covenant of Works
and the way in which its results are entailed." Much
of the discussion must be omitted, but the following
extracts will show the drift:

"In this covenant the principle of representation was
involved as an essential element. Christ, by the
appointment of the Father, and by His own spontane-
ous election, became the legal representative of the
elect seed who were given to Him to be redeemed. He
undertook all their legal responsibilities, as well as
those which related them to the preceptive require-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 179

merits of the moral law, as those which barred them as
transgressors to endure the penalty. Whatever the
laAv exacted of them, in order to their justification, he
as their representative obliged himself to render. The
life of obedience due from them He engaged to live;
the death demanded of them He bound Himself to
die.

"There is a distinction which is now strangely neg-
lected, but to which the Calvinistic theology ought to
be recalled, as vital to its consistency and complete-
ness. . . . The import of it is that, on the one hand,
the elect were, in mass, justified i7i foro Dei, in the
justification of Christ as their federal head and repre-
sentative; and, on the other hand, they are severally
justified m foro conscientiae, when, in the period of
their earthly history they actually exercise faith in
Christ. In the first instance, they are conceived as jus-
tified constructively, federally, representatively; m
the second, subjectively and consciously. In the first,
they were justified independently of their voluntary
conscience; in the second, they are justified through
their conscious exercise of faith.

"If the doctrine of the Covenants be scriptural, it
is too plain to need proof that there is a federal one-
ness of Christ and His seed. When, as their repre-
sentative, He yielded obedience to the law in order to
justification, they yielded that obedience in Him. His
representative acts and experiences, in relation to that
end, were theirs. Otherwise the principle of repre-
sentation is a figment and the term represe^itative a
sham. . . . TVHiat hinders, then, that we should hold
that when He was justified, they were justified with
Him? The consequence must follow if He was justi-
fied as their head and representative. Not subjectively

180 The Life Work of

and consciously, but federally and representatively,
they obeyed, died, and rose again, and were, in God's
heavenly court, justified, in Christ.

"Xow, inasmuch as no justification at God's ban is
conceivable except upon the ground of a perfect
righteousness, it is obvious that the elect seed of Christ
must have been, in some sense, adjudged to be right-
eous in order to their virtual justification. That sense
is, that they were righteous by imputation. . . .
Christ's righteous was, in God's court, imputed to
them in order to their justification in Him. Here, then,
it deserved to be noticed, we have a case of 'antecedent
and immediate imputation' of righteousness — ante-
cedent, since the imputation preceded the spiritual
birth of the elect ; immediate, since it was not condi-
tioned by or mediated through inherent and conscious
holiness.

"The elect seed of Christ having been thus, in the
court of heaven, virtually justified in Him, their repre-
sentative, were invested with a right and title to eter-
nal life. Then, when their earthly histor}^ emerges,
their righteous Advocate and priestly Intercessor, at
God's appointed time, sent out for them the gift of
the Holy Spirit, who, imparted to them by the Media-
torial King, enters into them, convinces them of their
sin and misery, illuminates them in a knowledge of
Christ as a Saviour, regenerates them, and enables
them to exercise that which conditions their conscious
and actual union with Jesus. Xot now are they, for
the first time, federally and representatively, but sub-
jectively and consciously justified. This is their actual,
in contradistinction from their virtual, justification.
In the order of production it succeeds regeneration,
as, in that order, virtual precedes it."

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 181

The author now turns to the parallel case of the
operation of the great principle of federal representa-
tion in the covenant of works.

"Now had Adam fulfilled the condition of the cove-
nant, that is, perfect obedience to the law, during the
specified time of his trial, his posterity would have
fulfilled the condition, would have rendered the obe-
dience in him. So was it, we have seen, in the case of
Christ and his seed. The obedience of the representa-
tive is the obedience of the represented — yielded not
subjectively and consciously, but federally, legally,
representatively. Nor does this destroy the reality of
the constituent's obedience. A representative's obe-
dience is as real as a conscious. They are differently
conditioned, but they are both real.

"It follows, also, that had Adam been justified his
posterity would in him have been justified in foro Dei.
They would have had previously to their conscious
existence, a virtual justification in him as their head
and representative. The analogy holds between the
virtual justification of Christ's seed in his justification
and the virtual justification of Adam's descendants in
him, on the supposition that he had fulfilled his proba-
tion. As no justification can take place except upon
the ground of a perfect righteousness, the race, accord-
ing to the supposition sharing his justification, would
have been, in the court of heaven, justified on the
ground of Adam's righteousness imputed to them.
These would, then, it is clear, have been an 'antecedent
and immediate imputation' to them of the righteous-
ness of their federal representative — antecedent, as
anticipating their personal existence and inherent
holiness; immediate, as directly terminating on them
without being mediated through their conscious virtue.

182 The Life Work of

And when they emerged into individual existence, they
would — I am bold enough, pursuing the analogy, to
think — have been actually justified upon their con-
scious acceptance of God's appointed method of justifi-
cation ; they would, in a word, have been both virtually
and actually justified on the ground of imputed right-
eousness. It would have been nature's plan, as it is
that of recovering grace.

"But Adam fell. Following the lead of the repre-
sentative principle, we cannot err in affirming that his
act of disobedience was the race's act of disobedience.
'They sinned in him, and fell with him in his first
transgression.' They sinned in him, they performed
his fatal act, not subjectively and consciously, but
federall3\ legally, representatively. It is equally evi-
dent that his condemnation was theirs. He was con-
demned not merely on his own account, but as their
legal representative; consequently, they were con-
demned in him. The sentence, passed in God's heavenly
court, terminated at the same time upon him and upon
his federal constituents. It was pronounced not in
foro conscientiae^ but in foi^o Dei. But as no sentence
of condemnation can be justly pronounced except upon
the ground of guilt, and as Adam's posterity was not
in conscious existence when they were thus condemned,
his guilt — the guilt of his first sin as representatively
their sin — was imputed to them as the ground of their
condemnation. It was not their guilt as contracted
subjectively and consciously, but as incurred federally,
legally, representatively. In the former sense the guilt
was that which attached to another's sin — peccatum
alimun; in the later, it was a guilt which resulted from
their own sin. The distinction is scriptural and obvi-
ous, and it is the only one which even approximately

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 183

relieves the difficulties which the speculative reason
encounters in its attempt to construe the facts of the
case. But whether the thinking faculty is satisfied or
not, faith accepts the exposition which it recognizes
as furnished by inspiration itself.

"Here, then, we have again an 'antecedent and imme-
diate imputation' — the imputation of Adam's guilt to
his posterity, which was antecedent to their personal
existence and subjective depravity, and which was
immediate, as not conditioned by or mediated through
their conscious corruption. The paralellism between
the two Adams and their respective seeds is in the
points indicated, without a joining element, condemna-
tion being substituted for justification in the instance,
of the first Adam and his race."

Having thus explained the import of the federal the-
ology the author passes to consider its regulative
influence — first upon the doctrines of natural religion,
the religion of law; secondly, upon those of super-
natural religion, the religion of redeeming grace.

In the realm of natural religion, it leaves no room
for Pelagianism with its monstrous dream that men are
born destitute of any character ; for Arminianism with
its theory of a family covenant and parental represen-
tative; for the various metaphysical theories that seek
to explain the responsiblity of the race for the sin of
Adam on other grounds than those of legal representa-
tion ; or for the theory that federal guilt and subjective
depravity so concur in the same concrete and inseper-
able experience that neither is in order to the other.

But it has in natural religion more than a negative
value. As to this positive influence we quote the
author, instead of giving the substance in condensed
form. "The regulative influence of the federal the-

184 The Life Work of

ology is in nothing more signally manifested than in
the fact that it affords the only tolerable solution of the
profound and awful mysteries which hang over the
moral history of the race. We are born in sin; we
begin our earthly career in spiritual death, disabled
for the performance of any holy act, and bound apart
from God's redeeming grace by a fatal necessity of
sinning; I say not of committing this or that partic-
ular sin, but of sinning. We are required to render a
perfect obedience to the divine law which we have no
ability to yield; failing that, we are commanded to
exercise faith in Christ which we have in ourselves no
power to put forth: we cannot deliver ourselves from
this mournful captivity to the law of sin and death,
we are bound in affliction and iron: and still we are
justly held responsible for this condition, are right-
eously condemnable for its existence and are liable, on
account of it, to the eternal pains of hell. Is it any
wonder that reason reels and staggers under the appar-
ent contradictions of the case? that she fumbles like
the blind and feels after some guiding hand? Now
if this were our original state, if thus we were at first
created, if our history had no other beginning than one
thus conditioned, the blackness of darkness would set-
tle down upon the problem. But reason cannot be
satisfied by such a supposition. She craves and
demands another. Kant's hypothesis of an extra-
temporal condition, and Julius Miiller's and Edward
Beecher's, of an ante-mundane existence, in which each
individual determined his destiny by a free self-decis-
ion, attest at once her anxiety and her inability to
escape from the gigantic difficulty. Scripture, phil-
osophy and consciousness being her guides, she is
estopped from taking that road for deliverance. Here

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 185

the Word of God comes to our help, and darts a morn-
ing beam into the deep midnight of the case. It
informs us that our history began not at our birth but
at the creation of Adam, not in the place of our
nativity, but in Paradise. In our first parent appointed
of God our head and representative, we had our legal
probation under a covenant, which conditioned upon
obedience for a limited time the attainment of justifi-
cation and adoption — of indefectible holiness and bliss.
In him we had freedom of will to elect the path of
rectitude and to stand in integrity, in him we were
endowed with amply sufficient grace to meet all the
requirements of the trial. But he sinned and we sinned
in him. He fell and we fell with him. We wilfully
threw away our ability to render obedience to God,
and, passing under the curse of a broken law, sunk
into our present condition of helpless inability as the
punishment of our foul and inexcusable revolt. This
is the solution which the federal theology affords of
the mysteries which enshrouded our moral state. Our
inability is not original, it is penal. Discard this solu-
tion furnished by the Oracles of God, and we shall find
that every other oracle is as dumb as the Theban
Sphinx." ^

In regard to the regulative influence of the federal
theolog}^ upon the doctrines of supernatural religion
attention is called to the fact that no Calvinist can
state the successive steps in the application of the
benefits of redemption apart from the federal scheme
without plunging into inextricable perplexity; that
this scheme is the bulwark of imconditional election,
partial atonement, effectual calling, and the final per-
severance of the saints.

186 The Life Work of

Here we bring to a close what we consider should be
said in a single chapter about the theology taught by
Dr. Girardeau in the class room. As intimated in the
beginning, it was thought advisable to state, as far as
possible in his own language, the distinctive feature of
his work in this department; and not to attempt to
cull from his many discussions of special topics in
theology a summary of his views. We will add to
this judgment the further consideration that under
Dr. Girardeau's distribution, or division, of theology
the federal principle becomes pervasive. He divides
theology into but two parts — the theology of natural
religion and the theolog;v' of evangelical religion. The
first division is concerned with all that is popularly
called natural theology and also includes the covenants
of works. The second division is concerned more par-
ticularly with what is embraced in the covenant of
grace. Under such a distribution the scope of the
federal principle is almost without limit. And we will
add, also, as a further reason for such extensive quota-
tions from the address on "The Federal Theology",
that the volume in which it was published is accessible
to very few readers of the present day.

The connection between certain branches of phil-
osophy and theology is very intimate. It must be so,
for the reason that they occupy common ground. Both
assume to teach Avhat is true concerning God and man.
Philosophy seeks to attain truth on these vast sub-
jects by speculation, while theology relies upon the
testimony of God in His Word. Both methods are
legitimate, but different conclusions are liable to be
reached unless, on the one hand, the student is pos-
sessed of a sound philosophy, and, on the other, of a
proper view of the office of review in regard to revela-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 187

tion. Church history is full of instances where phil-
osophy has been substituted for theology, and also of
the baleful influence false principles in philosophy
have exerted in the building of systems of theology.
It has become common in our theological seminaries
to meet this difficulty by requiring a course of lectures
to be given in the junior year on the subject of phil-
osophy, mental and moral. Dr. Girardeau's book,
"Discussions of Philosophical Questions," grew out of
this requirement. It grew out of the lectures on these
subjects he delivered to his classes. And we must fol-
low him into this branch of his work.

In the introduction we have the following explicit
statement of the author's purpose : "Should the ques-
tion be asked. What ends are sought to be accom-
plished by these discussions ? the answer is, in the gen-
eral, that the writer desired clearly to explicate and
enounce the views derived from his own reflections,
and that this desire was enhanced by the duty, bound
upon him professionally, to deliver a brief course* of
lectures, during each session, in the institution to
which he is attached. More particularly — and the
answer is given in all modesty — the end contemplated
by the writer has been to contribute something, so
far as his abilities would allow, toward a fuller devel-
opment of the destructive principles of the Scottish
philosophy."

The characteristics of this school of philosophy are
concisely given by Dr. James McCosh as follows: "I.
It proceeds on the method of observation, professedly
and really. In this respect it differs from nearly all
the philosophies which went before, from many of
those which were contemporary, and from some of
those which still linger among us. The method pur-

188 The Life Work of

sued in Eastern countries, in ancient Greece and Rome,
in the scholastic times, and in the earlier ages of mod-
ern European speculation, had not been that of induc-
tion, either avowedly or truly. ... To the Scottish
school belongs the merit of being the first, avowedly
and knowingly, to follow the inductive method, and to
employ it systematically in psychological investiga-
tion. As the masters of the school were the first to
adopt it, so they, and those who have borrowed from
them, are almost the only persons who have studiously
adhered to it. II. It employs self-consciousness as the
instrument of observation. It may thus be distin-
guished from some other schools with which it has
been confounded. . . . III. By the observation of
consciousness, principles are reached which are prior
to and independent of experience. This is another
grand characteristic of the school, distinguishing it,
on the one hand, from empiricism and sensationalism;
and, on the other hand, from the dogmatism and a
prior speculation of all ages and countries. It agrees
with the former in holding that we can construct a
science of mind only by observation, and out of the
facts of experience; but, then, it separates from them,
inasmuch as it resolutel}^ maintains that we can dis-
cover principles which are not the product of obser-
vation and experience, and which are in the very con-
stitution of the mind, and have these the sanction of
the Author of our nature. These are somewhat differ-
ently apprehended and described by the masters of the
school, some taking a deeper and others a more super-
ficial view of them. Hutchison calls them senses, and
finds them, in the very constitution of the mind. Eeid
designates them principles of common sense, and repre-
sents them as being natural, original and necessary.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 189

Stewart characterizes them as fundamental laws of
human thought and belief. Brown makes them intu-
itions simple and original. Hamilton views them
under a great many aspects, but seems to contemplate
them most frequently and fondly after the manner of
Kant, as a priori forms or conditions. But whatever
minor or major differences there may be in the fulness
of their exposition, or in the favorite views which they
individually prefer, all who are truly of the Scottish
school agree in maintaining that there are laws, prin-
ciples or poAvers in the mind anterior to any reflex
observation of them, and acting independently of the
philosophers' classification or explanation of them.''

Allow another quotation from McCosh's "The Scot-
tish Philosophy." "It has been the main aim of the
Scottish school, as modified and developed by Reid,
to throw back the scepticism of Hume. Reid tells us
that he once believed the received doctrine of ideas so
firmly as to embrace the whole of Berkeley's system
along with it, till, on discovering the consequences to
which it had been driven by Hume, he was led to
review the whole theory and abandon it. Kant
declares that he was roused from his dogmatic slum-
bers by the assaults of the Scottish sceptic, and was
thus impelled to the task of repelling the attack. . . .
It is interesting to observe the respective ways in
which the Scottish and the German metaphysicians
sought to meet the great skeptic. It is evident that
the assaults might be repelled at one or other of two
places; either when the foe has entered, or after he has
made certain advances. That the mind begins with
impressions and goes on to ideas, which are mere repro-
ductions of impressions — this is the fundamental prin-
ciple of Hume. . . . It is interesting to observe that

190 The Life Work of

Reid met him at both these points. . . . Kant exer-
cised his best power in meeting Hume at the other
(second) point; that is, in showing that there is an
a priori furniture in the mind, independent of all
experience. But what he built with one hand he took
down with the other. For these a priori forms could
not, in his theory, guarantee any objective reality. . . .
Sir W. Hamilton sought to unite Reid and Kant, but
was never able to weld thoroughly together the prin-
ciples which he took from two such different sources.
His doctrine of the relativity of knowledge, and of
causation as a mere importency of the mind, has pre-
pared the wa}^ for a doctrine of mere experience now
largely espoused."

These extracts from McCosh enable us the more fully
to appreciate the end and aim of Dr. Girardeau in his
"Discussions." Of the distinctive principles of the
Scottish philosophy and the errors of Hamilton he
says: "Those principles constrained his adherence by
their agreements, in his judgment, with the data of
consciousness and their necessary consequences, with
the common convictions of mankind, and with the
doctrines of divine revelation. But although consid-
ered for the most part sound and superior to any other
system, the Scottish philosophy did not appear to be
free from certain grave defects, or to have reached the
point of consummate development. This seemed to be
true, notwithstanding the fact that the extraordinary
learning and acumen of Sir William Hamilton were
employed in the effort to bring it to maturity. Indeed,
it must be confessed that the attempt of the great
philosopher to expand, s^^stematise and perfect it was
attended with certain inconsistencies of statement and
questionable doctrinal utterances, together with some

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 191

ambiguity in his positions, which resulted unhappily.
They exposed him to the unfriendly criticism of his
associationalist opponent, John Stuart Mill, gave some
plausibility to the claim of Herbert Spencer that his
agnosticism is justified by Hamilton's doctrine touch-
ing the knowledge of the Infinite, and — 'most unkind-
est cut of air — induced some of the supporters of the
Scottish philosophy to impute to him the maintenance
of the utter incognoscibility of God, and the atheistic
tendencies of that view." Taking this view of the situ-
ation, it was the noble aim of the author to "bring the
system into harmony with itself" — and to assist in
advancing the Scottish philosophy towards a com-
pleter and more definite development." It is probable
that these discussions ranged above the average capacity
of the students who heard them. There can be no
question, however, as to the ability with which they
are conducted or of their value to maturer minds
among the ministers and intelligent laymen of the
Church. All that can be attempted here is a glance at
a few of the points in which the author differs from
Hamilton. And this not so much for the psychologi-
cal value of the changes, as for their influence on
theology.

First, the author differs in some important particu-
lars from Hamilton's classification of the cognitive
powers. We wish to notice briefly one of these varia-
tions. Under the head of "Faculties of Mediate
Knowledge" he puts down three — Representative Fac-
ulty ; Thinking Faculty ; Believing Faculty. These give,
respectively. Representative Knowledge ; Thought-
Knowledge; Faith-Knowledge. In other words, the
Representative Faculty yields knowledge, and so do
the Thinking and the Believing Faculties. Faith is

192 The Life Work of

as truly a source of knowledge as reason. There is a
valid distinction between mediate and immediate
knowledge, but none whatever between faith and
knowledge. Knowledge is the genuine result of all the
cognitive faculties. The contrast to faith is not knowl-
edge, but cognition. We know, it is true, only what
stands in relation to the mind, but there are several
ways in which this relation may be established. Sense-
perception or memory or reflection may bring an object
before the mind; but so also may the report or testi-
mony of other persons. The old distinction that we
know what is present while we believe the unseen may
mislead us. The Bible makes faith a source of knowl-
edge. The author of the epistle to the Hebrews says:
"Through faith we understand that the worlds were
framed by the Word of God, so that things w^hich are
seen were not made of things which do appear." Our
Saviour says: "This is eternal life to know thee, the
only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent."
Faith being a source of knowledge, our author pro-
ceeds to discuss the question, "Have we a valid knowl-
edge of the Infinite Being?" This he tests both in the
sphere of natural and supernatural revelation. The
conclusion reached is that in neither sphere is a knowl-
edge of God as Infinite attained by the cognitive
reason. Must we, therefore, abandon hope of reaching
such knowledge ? By no means. In all our knowledge
there are two elements, one of which addresses itself
to the cognitive powers, the other to the believing fac-
ulty. It is the joint operation of these two classes of
faculties that gives the full result. We know sub-
stance; only, however, as it is manifested through its
properties. When the phenomena are apprehended by
the faculties of cognition, the existence of the sub-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 193

stance becomes known by an immediate and necessary
act of faith. In like manner, when the world is appre-
hended as contingent, the believing faculty, under the
law of the causal judgment, infers a self-existent
Creator. And the process is the same in the sphere of
Supernatural Revelation, the necessary conditions
being famished by the life-giving energy of the Holy
Ghost. Man was made to know God. There is in
every soul of man a fundamental faith which adapts
it to the knoAvledge of the Infinite Being. This propo-
sition will bear the test of all the criteria by which
fundamental beliefs are discriminated. And Avhen this
native faith is developed by a cognitive experience, it
gives valid knowledge of the Infinite God.

Still another question in this connection is raised by
the author. Granting that we have a valid knowledge
of the Infinite God, he goes on to inquire, "Is it possi-
ble for the reason to employ it as an element in the
processes of science?" The significance of this ques-
tion will be recognized at once by all who have refiected
upon the difficulty of finding a satisfactory definition
of theology, or of allowing to it, in strictness of speech,
the character of a science. In grappling w^ith this
problem, the author notices first that we may define
without limiting. For instance, unless we are Pan-
theists, we must distinguish the divine substance from
all created substance. And yet we do not limit it.
Again, Ave distinguish one divine attribute from
another, but do not limit any of them. Again it is
admitted that, while we know the fact of God's exist-
ence, we do not know hoio he exists. It is the fact that
God is Infinite that w^e know. It is revealed to faith.
"It is susceptible to affirmation and negation — ^may be
made a term of human judgments. In like manner, a

194 The Life Work of

divine attribute cannot be perfectly comprehended by
us, but it may be known as an infinite perfection by
faith; and as known may be made the subject or the
predicate of a proposition. Cognition may furnish one
term and faith the other, and the proposition be valid.
For example, we are entitled to make the affirmation:
the justice of God is infinite. Cognition gives justice
a particular kind of perfection, as the subject, and
faith gives the term infinite as predicable of justice.
Here, then, we have an infinite element as a valid con-
stituent of a premise, and as other premises may be
construed in the same wa}^, legitimate conclusions may
be drawn. But if we may reason about the Infinite
and from the infinite, it is manifest that it may con-
stitute a valid element in human science under the
limitations, howcA^er, which have been pointed out."

We pass now to notice his criticism of Hamilton's
doctrine of Causation. The importance of correct
views on the nature of cause and of the origin of the
causal judgment cannot be exaggerated. The mind is
constructed with reference to knowledge as distinctly
as the eye is to sight. Take away such notions as those
of unity, of plurality, of differences, of identity, of
cause, and you make it impossible to compare our
impressions or to attain the conception of general laws.
KnoAv ledge is just the application of primitive con-
cepts of the understanding to the material furnished
by sense or consciousness. In this way we know the
sensible realities. But in order to rise above the sensi-
ble the mind must be furnished with primitive beliefs,
as well as original concepts. It is generally recognized
that without the native belief that every effect must
have an adequate cause there could be no speculative
knowledge of God. But the play of this principle in

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 195

the sphere of revealed religion should not be over-
looked. What is the Bible but an effect of a super-
natural influence of the Holy Ghost exerted on certain
men who were of God to be his organs in communi-
cating his mind and will to men? And what is
redemption but a work which manifests the deity of its
author? Hume recognized the importance of the doc-
trine of causation. He seized upon the prevalent phil-
osophy of his time to eliminate from the idea of cause
the element of efficiency. All that the senses can per-
ceive is antecedence and sequence, and that is all we
can know. That the antecedent produces what follows
is no part of the idea of cause. Our knowledge in the
case goes no further than our experience. The causal
judgment is a fancy. Kant came to the rescue, but
unfortunately, while he vindicated the intuition of the
mind, he made the particular law of causation entirely
subjective. It regulates the order of our thoughts, but
does not certify that things exist as we think them.
Hamilton applied his doctrine of the conditional to the
case and reached the conclusion that the causal judg-
ment is not the result of a positive but of a negative
necessity of thought — that it is not the native product
of a faculty of the soul, but springs from a native
impotency. We wish we had space to introduce to the
readers Dr. Girardeau's criticism of Hamilton's errors
both as to the nature of the idea of cause and as to the
origin of the causal judgment. It is both unfair and
unsatisfactory to cite a single paragraph from a long
and labored discussion. But to this we are compelled
for want of space. Hamilton's position is that the
causal judgment lies between the two inconceivable
and contradictory extremes of an absolute commence-
ment or an infinite series of relative commencements.

196 The Life Work of

Neither is conceivable, and hence mental impotency.
But as contradictory, one or the other must be true.
Consciousness decides through its testimony to free
acts of the will that an absolute commencement is the
true extreme. A negative judgment of the mind can-
not counterbalance the express affirmative of conscious-
ness. We know that we are the responsible authors of
our actions. The following quotation will intimate
the course of the argument in refuting Hamilton's doc-
trine: "If these things be so, Hamilton's argument
against the view that the law of causality is original
and underived breaks down. The argument is that
nothing is to be assumed as an original, special prin-
ciple of the mind, operating by a positive necessity,
which can be shown to result from a mere mental pow-
erlessness. The causal judgment, he contends, is in this
category: it is enforced by a negative necessity occa-
sioned by an inability of the mind to conceive the con-
trary. Hence there is no original, fundamental law,
no special positive principle of causality in the mind.
His minor — namely, that the causal judgment is
derived from a mental impotence — has been shown to
be inconclusive. . . . The other argument of Hamil-
ton against such a positive, fundamental law of belief
also gives way — to wit, that, as consciousness affirms
the fact of an absolute commencement, it contradicts
the hypothesis of an original law which demands a
cause for everything which begins to be ; and that our
nature would be self-contradictory and mendacious on
the supposition of the existence of such a law and of
the testimony of consciousness in opposition to it ; but
we have seen that consciousness makes no such affirma-
tion."

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 197

The last contribution to philosophy made by Dr.
Girardeau, which we will notice, is his treatise on "The
Will in Its Theological Relation." As his views on
this subject have been exposed to not a little criticism,
attention should be called to the fact that they were
not hastily adopted by him. He tells us in the preface
to the volume something of its history. In the year
1849, while a licensed probationer for the gospel min-
istry, a sentence in a sermon in pamphlet form, by Dr.
Thornwell, suggested to his mind some serious ques-
tions. Not feeling satisfied with the solution given by
Dr. Thornwell in a subsequent interview, he worked
out his own answers, but did not obtrude them upon
the minds of others. During the war Jonathan
Edwards' "On the Will" was one of his companions in
the army and was carefully studied. In 1871 the first
two volumes of "Dr. Thornwell's Collected Writings"
were issued, and about the same time the "Systematic
Theology" of Dr. Charles Hodge. His surprise was
great to find himself relieved from the necessity of
being cautious in the expression of his views as they
seemed after all to be taught substantially by both of
these masters in Israel. "In 1877, a controversy involv-
ing the theological relations of the will occurred
between two distinguished combatants, conducted on
the one side in the Methodist Quarterly Review and on
the other in The Southey^n Preshyterian Revieio. In
the progress and results, so far as reached, of this
debate I became intensely interested, and published
two articles in The Southern Presbyterian Revieio on
the subject of the Freedom of the Will in Its Theo-
logical Relations. These articles were challenged and
criticised by an able writer in the pages of the same
Review. This led to the addition of four articles,

198 The Life Work of

making six in all, which were published in The
Revieio. The remaining part of the work was subse-
quently written.''

The Avork treats of the will in man's four different
estates of innocency, hereditary sin, grace and glory.
It is not necessary, however, to follow him over this
broad field. AVhat our purpose requires is simply to
collect from the volume what is peculiar to Dr. Girar-
deau's teaching. And the task is still further shortened
by the fact that the whole treatise greAv out of a pain-
ful conviction of the author that the doctrine of the
will taught by Jonathan Edwards fails either to
ground the sense of human guilt or to acquit God of
the charge of being the author of sin. For this reason
he regarded it as an insufficient account of the freedom
of the will. The case, as Dr. Girardeau saw it, is set
forth in the following extracts: "AVe pass on to show
that the theory of Edwards, either as held by himself
or as modified by those who essentially agree Avith it,
fails to ground the sense of guilt and to acquit God of
the chartje of beinff the author of sin, and is therefore
an insufficient account of the freedom of the will. The
point in Avhich they all concur is the denial to the will
of any self-determining power, that is, of any power
to originate its determination — of any real, causal
efficiency in itself, and the affirmation that its Abolitions
are efficiently caused by the sum of motiA^es existing in
the soul. . . . They agree in affirming moral necessity
of all the acts of the will, that is, they hold that the
acts of the will, whateA'er they may be, are unavoid-
able. They could not be otherwise than they are in any
giA'en case. The man wills freely, but he cannot will
otherwise than he does. He acts in accordance with a
force operating invincibly and inevitably through the

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 199

will itself. The force is the spontaneity and habitus
of the man himself. He always acts in accordance
with, never against it. The law which the adherents
of the principle of determinism coincide in announcing
is : As is the moral spontaneity of the man, so must be
his volitions — the spontaneity determines the will ; the
will never determines the spontaneity. This is Ed-
wards' moral necessity, a necessity not imposed in the
way of physical constraint, but springing from the dis-
positions of the man himself. Now, every Calvinist
must admit the possible co-existence of such a necessity
with the highest form of freedom. They concur in
God, in the elect angels, and in glorified men. The
only question is — and it is of the utmost consequence —
Does this concurrence take place in every supposable
case? Did it obtain in the instance of the non-elect
angels and of Adam in innocence? We do not object
to the possible concurrence of this necessity and free-
dom of will. We admit it as a fact in some actual
instances. We deny that it must always exist — that
it is the result of a universal and invariable law. . . .
Let us settle our view of this concurrence theory. Its
essence is that the will, morally considered, has, under
no conceivable circumstances or relations, any power
to act otherwise than in conformity to the moral spon-
taneity of the soul. Its freedom consists in its follow-
ing the law of the spontaneity. It must be what the
spontaneity is. Now, the question starts up: What
determines the moral sj)ontaneity which thus deter-
mines the will? What is its origin? What is the
cause which produces it? For we are agreed in
demanding a cause for every effect. It will not do to
say, it is sufficient to know that the spontaneity belongs
to the man himself, and in acting in accordence with

200 The Life Work of

it, he is only expressing himself. That ma}- be true,
but that accounts only for self-expression, as Dr.
Thornwell well remarks, and not for self-determina-
tion. HoAv comes the man to be conditioned thus and
so? Did he have any voluntary agency in inducing
that moral type of being which now characterises him
beyond his power to change it, or did he not? If he
did not, he only develops his natural constitution when
he sins. Not to sin would be to violate the original
laws of his being. It can not be conceived that he
would be more to blame than is a poisonous plant in
producing poisonous fruits in accordance with the law
of its nature. If he did, then he must have done so
by a self-determination of the will, that is, a determi-
nation uncaused by a preceding moral spontaneity;
for, upon the supposition, he determined the spon-
taneity and was not determined by it. . . . And the
question resolves itself into this : Did Adam, by a free
self-decision which might have been avoided, deter-
mine himself in the direction of sin? Here the issue
is to be joined. This is the real place at which the
discussion of the self-determining power of the will
must be had. It is idle to transfer the question to the
will in its present sinful condition. It is the case of
Adam which is critical, typical, controlling. . . . The
question before us, then, is did Adam, in the commis-
sion of the first sin, act from necessity — that is, was his
first sin unavoidable? or did he commit it by an unne-
cessitated and avoidable decision of his will? Now,
either he was in some sense necessitated to the com-
mission of the sin, or he was not. If he was, then God
must have been the author of the necessity."

In a word, Dr. Girardeau demands for the will, in
the case of an innocent creature on probation, the

JoHX L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 201

power of contrary choice. He thinks the angels that
kept not their first estate must have possessed it; and
that Adam, when he was on trial for himself and his
natural posterity, must have been endowed with such
a power. He would not say that the sin of Adam and
his fall were uncertain events, but he would say that
they mioht have been avoided. Still further Dr. Girar-
deau holds that we are bound to conform our view of
the constitution and working of Adam's soul in inno-
cence to the requirements of the revealed facts of
imputed guilt and the impossibility of God's causal
agency in the fall. A psychology built on the testi-
mony of the consciousness of fallen man cannot be
transferred to him while undergoing probation. "The
undoubted principles of a correct theology must be
held to be regulative of the conclusions which flow
from a merely philosophical process, so far as com-
mon ground has been occupied."

It is not to be supposed that a strong and earnest
mind, thoroughly imbued with the principles of the
Federal theology, would have reached conclusions so
different from those of contemporary Calvinistic
writers if there had been entire agreement as to the
question under discussion and in the use of terms. Jus-
tice requires that Dr. Girardeau be allowed to make
his own statement of the question, and to define his
use of terms. We refer the reader to his treatise for
the larger portion of the statement, having room only
for two of the more important particulars covered
by it.

In stating the question at issue Dr. Girardeau uses
the following words: "An illegitimate distinction is
made between the man and the will. What is the will,
but a power of the man? If, therefore, the man is

202 The Life Work of

free, his will is free; else the unity of the soul is
destroyed. And this becomes the more glaringly inad-
missible when, in consequence of this unnatural schism,
freedom is denied to the faculty which is by eminence
that of action, and restricted to those which are only
active in a limited degree. . . . The question which
it is proposed now to consider is not. whether the soul
may be free, while the will is not, but whether the
soul is free in willing — that is, whether the will is
free." Let us now introduce the statement of another
author, and we will see how wide apart they are at the
beginning of the discussion. He says: "Another
ambiguity still more mischievous is found in the cur-
rent phrase, 'the freedom of the will.' Locke has very
clearly raised the question of the propriety of the
phrase, by asking whether fredom or liberty is not
always thought as the attribute of a personal agent,
and not of a faculty or power. This question discloses
the confusion of the statement. It is the human spirit
which is free in all its responsible volitions, and not
the faculty of the will. Were freedom ascribed to any
other faculty or power of the spirit, the absurdity
would be at once apparent."

Dr. Girardeau raises the question, ''What is the rela-
tion which the Will sustains to the other powers?"
To this perhaps most followers of the general theory
of Edwards would say : The human spirit is subject to
laws of action regulative of its faculties in their freest
processes. In order to the rise of a volition there
must be an object presented to the intelligence of the
spirit which chooses. The object must be seen by the
mind not only as attainable but also as good. And
Avhether the object will appear desirable or good will
depend upon the disposition of the man. Dr. Girar-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 203

dean would answer as follows: "We would express
it (the relation) as that of elective obedience. It fur-
nishes no laws or regulative standards of action. These
are given by the other faculties, and it is its province,
by its choice, to comply with them. ... It is its
peculiar office — and it has a mysterious power to per-
form it — to choose the suggestions of the other facul-
ties, to assimilate them into its own nature and to
make them the proximate inducements to personal
action. ... In discharging this office, the will estab-
lishes a spontaneous hahitus of its own, an inclination,
appetency, nisus toward the doing of those things, the
attainment of those ends, to which it had received
direction from the other faculties."

We have now said all that seems to us necessary in
order to enable the reader to fix Dr. Girardeau's rela-
tive position as a teacher of theolog}^ and of philoso-
phy. The work was undertaken at the earnest request
of the family, and it has been to me a labor of love. I
greatly preferred that it should be entrusted to some
one of Dr. Girardeau's own students, who would be
better qualified to do it creditably. But I am not sorry
to have an opportunity to give some slight manifesta-
tion of regard for one who was so kind and so helpful
to me at the beginning of my work as his successor in
office.

Two estimates of Dr. Girardeau as a teacher and
as a member of the Thursday Afternoon Conferences,
furnished at my request, will close this sketch. The
first is by Eev. Thomas P. Hay, D. D. :

"I entered the junior class in the Seminary about a
month before Dr. Girardeau entered the institution
as Professor of Theology. And it was my privilege

204 The Life Work of

to be his scholar during the period of his transition
from the eloquent pulpit orator to the professor and
teacher. He impressed and greatly helped me by his
gift of analysis and of clarifying things by making
distinctions, and of logical development of thought;
and by the hapjoy faculty of fixing thought and truth,
thus elucidated by the illustrations of his imagination
and the charms of his eloquence.

"Dr. Girardeau required his students to write out
from memory an analysis of his lectures, or a recapitu-
lation of the portion of a text-book gone over in a
recitation, embodying am^ criticism he made on the
author's statements. One of these analyses would be
read and criticized by the professor at the beginning
of the next class-hour. By this exercise I learned to
preach without any notes in six months' time ; and the
l^rofessor's system of theology took full hold on my
understanding and memory. I could recall his argu-
ments and reasonings on all theological questions
raised, and even his personal opinions on matters on
which Calvinists differed. I have often said that, next
to my revered father, I owed more to Dr. Girardeau
than any other man; and this was due to the above
characteristics. He certainly taught me theology,
established my convictions in the truth of the Calvin-
istic system and trained my mind.

"Let me add to this my impression of his kindliness
to his students and his sympathy and readiness to come
down to the student's ground and point of view. He
reasoned and argued as an equal ; so that a young man
was not afraid to raise his questions and difficulties,
and felt free to differ with him and argue out his own
contention.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 205

"He impressed me in the Conferences very much, as
doubtless he did the congregations whom he served as
pastor. He was spiritual, edifying, earnest, eloquent
and loving."

The second is from Eev. B. P. Reid:

"Students under Dr. Girardeau got a great deal
more from him than a mere knowledge of the truths
he taught. This is useful enough as far as it goes, and
is about all that is to be gathered from many teachers
reputed to be great. But there ought to be more in
every teachei' than his mere mental machinery. Won-
derful as was Dr. Girardeau's mental power, there was
something in him far beyond this, because, under him,
we got an impression of a man which lingers with us
as an inspiration in life.

"Who could fail to be impressed with his devotion
to truth which amounted to an absorbing passion with
his soul? The very intensity of his love of it made
him so quick and positive in the expressions of his
conviction of it, as to cause some to suspect him of a
lack of charity to those opposed to his view, which
was far from being true. When he discussed the great
doctrines of theology who could fail to be touched by
his evident feeling of awe in the presence of these
great facts about God, and who could escape the con-
viction that his soul saw reaches not perceived by the
ordinary mind ?

"Eloquence and wit, both natural to him, enlivened
all his class-room lectures and talk. Never have we
heard anywhere his equal in the power of apt and
original illustration drawn from Scripture incident,
and of clothing great thoughts easily and rapidly in
their appropriate garments of words.

206 The Life Work of

"We admired, necessarily, Dr. Girardeau's great
power as class-room lecturer and preacher, and we
loved him for his sympathy. This Avas so deep and
so pure as to lead him to be absolutely forgetful of
himself in the use of all that he had. His evident joy
in the opportunity to help, whether with instruction,
advice, or money, is something long to be remembered
by those under him. The wa}^ in which he followed
us out into life with a kindly interest which grew with
the years, showed that his sympathy w-as no passing
emotion, but belonged to the very composition of his
being. To this hour I can not recall, without emotion,
the last time I remember seeing him when he called
me to him across the crowded street of the city with
all the joy of youth in his voice over the sight of a
friend. He ofttimes refreshed and encouraged us
with his s} mpathy in life, and this made it especially
hard when we had to be told that the hour of his
departure was at hand."

Upon his resignation the following paper was unani-
mously adopted:

"In accepting the resignation of Dr. John L. Girardeau. L.L. D.,
as Professor of Didactic and Polemic Theology, the Board
of Directors of Columbia Theological Seminary would note the
fact that this action on our part has been taken most reluct-
antly, and not until we had used every effort to induce him to
continue his connection with us, and had been assured by him
that this action on his part was final, and that his connection
with the faculty must close with the present term.

"The Board takes this occasion to express its grateful appre-
ciation of the valuable services he has, through these many
years, rendered to this institution. He has given to us the
best of his life, and has favored our students with his splendid
abilities. As an active worker he goes out from our halls, but

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 207

his memory, a precious legacy, shall remain in our minds, and
our affection for him shall never go out of our hearts.

"As for his work, it has been wrought out of and upon mate-
rial that is immortal, and will forever abide a splendid monu-
ment to the honor and glory of Him he so faithfully followed
and so devotedly served."

The following resolutions were adopted by the fac-
ulty of the Seminary:

"In view of the retirement of Rev. J. L. Girardeau, D. 1).,
L.L. D., the faculty wish to place on record their sincere regret
at the dissolution of his relation to the Seminary, in which lio
has so long been an honored professor.

"1. Resolved, That we hereby express our appreciation of his
talents, scholarship, eloquence, piety and loyalty to the truth,
which have made him the peer of the great theologians nnd
preachers of the country and century.

"2. Resolved, That as a member of the faculty, he was wise
in counsel, courtly in his bearing, kind and considerate towards
his co-professors, while firm and decided in his convictions.

"3. Resolved, further, That the prayers of the faculty shall
follow him while we indulge the hope that he may yet be
spared for many years of usefulness in the Church.

"4. Resolved, That these resolutions be published in the
papers of our Church and in those of the city, and that the
clerk is directed to furnish Dr. Girardeau a copy of the same."

NOTE.

The editor has added Dr. Girardeau's inaugural
address to Dr. Hall's article as an appendix. It should
have appeared in the "Discussion of Theological Ques-
tions," but was omitted by a mistake. The editor is
especially anxious to preserve it, as Dr. Girardeau was
accustomed to say of it, "This is about the length of my
tether."

CHAPTER VII

THE PRESBYTER

By R. A. Webb, D. D., LL. D.

•J Dr. Girardeau was first of all a Christian. His piety
was intellectual, bottoming itself upon the profound
and steady convictions of his great mind. It was fer-
vent, drawing upon all the strong emotions of his sen-
sitive heart. It was ethical, involving his conscience in
the deepest sense of sin, and making duty stand above
him as an imperial master. It laid its hand upon his
will, carrying him fearlessly to his tasks, and into con-
troversies which were painful to his spirit. He was
above all a devout man.

.Next to his piety he was a preacher. Among others,
he stood par excellence. Reasoning and rhetoric,
physique and presence, voice and vocalization, gesture
and grace, all waited upon his command. His pulpit
eloquence was not like the gradual ascent of the Rocky
Mountains, by one long, splendid, continuous climb;
there were a succession of climatic flights in each ser-
mon, like the undulating beauty of the picturesque
Blue Ridge.

The story of his sermon on "The Last Judgment"
illustrates his reputation and popularity as a preacher.
He prepared this sermon while a student in the Theo-
logical Seminary. It became very popular, and con-
gregations frequently called for it. Once, after he had
become a professor in the Seminary, the Legislature
of South Carolina requested him to preach it. He did
so in the First Presbyterian Church of Columbia. A

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 209

great congregation was present, crowding both the
floor and galleries, which were then on three sides of
the building. The preacher was fully up to himself, in
voice, gesture and spirit. Contrary to his general cus-
tom, he delivered it from the manuscript. It was an
hour and a half long. Attention was tense from the
first. But when the flute-like voice rose to its best, rein-
forced by the silent language of gesture and face, many
of the hearers stretched themselves forward as far as
they could reach. Tears poured down cheeks and spit-
tle fell from relaxed mouths. When the preacher's
voice hushed the multitude fell back into position with
an audible heave, which sounded as if it had come
simultaneously from every breast.

Then he was a philosopher^ whose mind roamed, with
intoxicating delight, the raised fields of loftiest specu-
lation, but always settled down at the footstool of Con-
sciousness and Common Sense.

He was next a theologian, interpreting the facts of
the Bible into the doctrines of the Christian Faith, then
organizing them into a system which satisfied his loy-
alty to both Revelation and Reason.

But, in his many-sidedness, he was also a presbyter
of the first rank. He loved the Christian Life, the
Christian Faith, and the Christian Philosophy, and the
Christian Order also. In his estimation, Church Polity
took not an unimportant, but only a lesser, rank than
Doctrine. He thought much upon this topic, and read
widely in this department. He was an ecclesiastical
statesman, and a skilful practitioner in the courts of
his Church.

He believed that the Church ivas a divine institution
and not a human organization. Its constitution and
powers, its officers and agencies, were all indicated in

210 The Life Work of

the Scriptures. He held tenaciously to the principle,
"Whatsoever is not commanded is forbidden." He
applied it in the realm of doctrine, discipline and wor-
ship. It was the only one which would safely protect
the conscience, and insure religious liberty for the mem-
bers of the Church. (He always resisted any proposi-
tion, policy, or custom which he thought logically
infringed this fundamental tenet. With him it was
regulative, and all-controlling. He denied that volun-
tarism which phrased itself, "Whatsoever is not forbid-
den is permitted." The Church was a divine organi-
zation, with a divine constitution, and all ecclesiastical
action must be remorselessly ruled by the proposition
that whatsoever is not commanded, either explicitly or
implicitly, in Scripture is unlawful and forbidden.
The Church has no discretionary power. None in its
didactic, in its diacritic, nor in its diatactic spheres.
Both its ecclesiology and its practice must be wholly
biblical. He had not the least bit of sympathy with
voluntarism in any of its forms or applications.

Yet, while holding this high doctrine of the nature,
organization and authority of the Church, Dr. Girar-
deau was not a High Churchman. He believed in the
fallibility of all synods and councils. Their decrees
were of force only when consonant with the Word of
God. Then they were binding, not because they were
ecclesiastical, but because they were biblical. As eccles-
iastical, they were venerable presumptions, but they
must be sanctioned by Scripture to bind the conscience
and conduct. The Church was not a source of author-
ity. It was but an organ for expressing the authority
of God to the world. Hence all its decisions must be
biblical to be binding.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 211

He passionately believed in the spirituality of the
Church. He thought its sphere was defined by the
Scriptures, even as were its powers. Church and State
were separated by the ordinance of God. Each was a
trespasser when it obtruded into the realm of the
other. Synods and councils could handle nothing but
biblical matters. Political, social, economic topics lay
entirely outside its charter. The Church must protect,
as well as sanction, the human conscience. He was hos-
tile to Komanism and all prelatical tendencies to put
the Church over the State. He was just as stoutly
opposed to all forms of an Erastianism, which would
subordinate the Church to the State. They were not
intersecting circles. The Church was limited to the
religion of the Bible, and all its powers, when acting
upon purely biblical subjects, were only ministerial and
declarative. She has no right to inflict any physical
penalties of any kind whatsoever. Hence, when the
General Assembly of his Church in 1861 laid down a
political policy and prescribed a political programme,
he joined the party of Southern resistants and found
himself one of the founders and fathers of his denomi-
nation. To the day of his death he held this doctrine
of the spirituality of the Church, and in its interest
resisted all efforts at organic union with the Northern
body, which he felt had offended against it, and had
never adequately repented of doing so.

Dr. Girardeau was a jure divino Presbyterian. He
was no opportunist. He did not believe that the Scrip-
tures were non-committal on the form of church gov-
ernment, leaving the whole matter to the discretion^of
each body of believers. He believed a pattern had been
shown in the Mount, and that that pattern was Presby-
terianism.

212 The Life Work of

His Presbyter ianism was not a mere inheritance. It
was not the expediential product of his environment.
He was born in a community where both prelacy and
independency were influential. His ecclesiology was
the product of wide reading and much reflection. He
earnestly investigated Popery and Prelacy, Congrega-
tionalism and Independency. I have not infrequently
heard him say that it was easy for him to see the
unscripturalness of Popery and Prelacy, and also Con-
gregationalism in its pure and unmodified forms; but
that it was not so clear to him, in his early ministry,
that the Independent Presbyterian Church was not the
New Testament ideal. There was the Church at Jeru-
salem, and the Church at Antioch, and the Church at
Corinth, and at other places. Each was Presbyterian
in its form, but was there a Presbytery binding them
into an organic union with each other? This was not
so obvious. By and by he came to see that there were
not only "churches," but a "Church," of which they
were units. Then as each of the "churches" were Pres-
byterian, by good and necessary inference the "Church"
over all must be Presbyterian. It was then easy for
him to see the logicalness of appljdng the presbyterial
idea to the formation of "sessions," "i^resbyteries,"
"synods," and "assemblies." And sometimes he talked
fascinatingly and enthusiastically about Thornwell's
dream of a "Presbyterian Parliament of the World."
Yet he opposed the formation of "The Pan-Presbyte-
rian Alliance" on expediential grounds.

While Dr. Girardeau was thus soundly convinced
that the biblical form of church government was Pres-
byterian, he was not bigoted and exclusive. His evan-
gelical spirit made him fraternize, with all big-hearted-
ness, with all evangelical denominations. He used to

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 213

tell the story that once his beloved brother and friend,
Dr. Gadsden, an Episcopal clergyman, said to him,
"Girardeau, the older I get the less denominational I
become." Dr. Girardeau replied, "Gadsden, the older
I get the more denominational I become." Dr. Gads-
den answered, "Your statement is surprising; I thought
you were growing in grace." Dr. Girardeau replied,
"My denominational creed teaches me that there are
other sheep not of the Presbyterian fold ; and the older
I get the more heartily do I believe it ; hence, as I grow
in grace I am growing in denominationalism."

The story illustrates that he w\as a convinced Presby-
terian, a loyal and devoted lover of his denomination,
but unbigoted and catholic in his spirit towards all the
evangelical denominations. At the same time he was
unfraternal and uncompromising towards those who
denied essential doctrines of the Christian Faith. For
example, he was intolerant of Papists and Unitarians.

He was faithful in his attendance upon the church
courts. He almost invariably participated in their
deliberations. In his discussions he would illuminate
principles, draw distinctions, extricate the proposition
from confusion, set it out clearly, and then advocate it
or opi^ose it, with a logic that was generally convincing,
and with an eloquence that was always charming. He
kept a watchful eye upon all policies that were pro-
posed, and when their subject-matter was serious, he
took a hand in their consideration. When he offered a
report he generally sustained it with a speech that
appealed to the reason and the heart of the members.
Many of his finest arguments and most thrilling
declamations were on questions where opinion was not
divided. It was always an object with him to clear the
minds and stimulate the interest and arouse the zeal

214 The Life Work of

of his fellow-presbyters. When an issue was joined
with him he was always a courteous debater, never
indulging in flings, almost never personal, argumenta-
tive and fair. He never dignified trivialities. He never
wrangled for victory. Meetings rarely broke with a
sting which he had caused. It was his habit to fore-
cast, as far as he could, the matter which would come
before the body, and then carefully prepare himself for
its discussion. He made a rule early in his ministry to
go to the meetings of the judicatories of his Church
with at least one topic carefully considered, and laid
out in an orderly manner in his mind. Many of the
brethren went to the Presbytery in the hope of hearing
a speech from him. It was always a treat and an edifi-
cation when he took the floor on any matter.

He despised every species of i3oliticating in the
church courts. He never sought his ends by indirec-
tion, arts, or tricks. Open in all his views, transparent
in all his methods, he scorned to take "the under hold."
'^Brave and honest, he relied upon truth and fact. Gen-
erous, he confessed when defeated, and acknowledged
when a point was made against him. He was a leader,
not by seeking the pre-eminence, but by his command-
ing intellect, suffused with his lovable qualities of
heart.

He was not litigious and captious and quarrelsome.
To him the filings of the sanctuary were worth all the
gold of Egypt, all the gold of the world, and he
unshrinkingly contended for "the faith which was once
delivered unto the saints." It was this spirit which car-
ried him into the controversy over evolution. He felt
then that the Bible's statement of fact was challenged,
and that his loyalty to the faith called upon him to
resist its introduction into the teachings of his Church.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 215

While he did not relish defeat, he had little ambition
for mere personal triumph.

His brethren often sent him as a commissioner to the
General Assembly, the supreme court of his Church.
Especially when they foresaw some important matter
looming upon the horizon. He was made the Modera-
tor of that body in 1874, when it met at Columbus^
Miss. The next year it met at St. Louis, and, according
to custom. Dr. Girardeau preached the opening sermon,
which was an argument to show that the Church had no
discretionary power, but must restrict itself, in all its
teachings and actings, to the Word of God. All his
life he was a member of the Charleston Presbytery and
the Synod of South Carolina.

The views on many Church questions which Dr.
Girardeau espoused, and advocated with tongue and
pen, are interesting.

Having been a missionary to the negroes when they
were slaves and after they were freed, he had a deep
and abiding concern in the religious and ecclesiastical
life of these inferior people. Both on his own account,
and at the instruction of Presbytery, Synod, and
Assembly, he gave much attention to the best solution
of this problem. He knew that these people were, by
nature, almost destitue of executive and managerial
qualities. He consequently opposed the organization of,
an Independent Colored Presbyterian Church. He also
knew the irreconcilable antipathies of the two races to
being mixed in a common organization, and felt that
such a course would be against the religious welfare of
both. He consequently favored their organization
under the tuition and patronage of their white brethren
until such time as they might be prepared for a sepa-
rate and independent Church life.

21 G The Life Work of

He opposed the introduction of instruments of music
into the public worship of God's house. In this he
stood with ThornwelL Breckinridge, Dabney. Peck and
Adger. He defended this position on the ground that
it was violative of the great Protestant principle that
whatsoever is not commanded is forbidden. He held
that the instruments of music, which were used in the
Temple, belonged to its typical and symbolical service,
and passed away with all the ceremonial system of
Israel. He consistently never had an organ in a church
of which he was pastor.

He was opposed to all ritual and liturgA^ for the
reason that they did not belong to a spiritual dispensa-
tion of religion, and logically lead to a dead formalism.
Throughout his life he resisted any proposition which
looked in the direction of giving any forms of worship.
The shroudings of the middle ages made his heart sick,
and the unheartiness of present-day ritualists filled him
with fears. Worship must be free and untrammeled,
the uncrutched coming of the soul into the presence of
its God.

Dr. Girardeau held a high doctrine of the ministry.
It was a sacred office. No man might take it upon him-
self. He must be called of God. A conviction of the
Spirit in the soul of the applicant was an essential ele-
ment in this call. He must be well educated in the
original languages of the Bible, in church history and
theology, and in all the subjects specified in the Book
of Church Order. Ordination put the applicant into
possession of the office, and installation put him into the
exercise of that office in a particular charge or work.
AYlien thus set apart, he must devote himself supremely
to its duties. As a j^resbyter, he ever sought to hold up

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 217

the standards of preparation, and insisted upon regu-
larity and fidelity.

He drew a distinction between "preaching" and
"exhorting." One was official and authorized, the other
was unofficial, and motived by the general Christian
spirit. Hence he thought "candidates" and "lay evan-
gelists" ought, in the interest of good order, to keep
before the public that they were not the official exposi-
tors of the gospel, but were commending it on their per-
sonal responsibility. He thought a good way to make
such an advertisement was for the "preacher" to occupy
the pulpit, and for the "exhorter" to stand on the floor
when addressing public assemblies. He was eager for
every lover of the Lord Jesus to do his level best to lead
people to the Saviour, but he was a strict construction-
ist. He loved order. He feared disorder. "Let him
that heareth say come," but let him always respect the
ways prescribed in Scripture. Contempt of "red tape"
would lead to confusion. Confusion would ultimate in
injury. A door was wide open to every disciple of
Christ, ordained and unordained, male and female,
young and old. But each must observe the rules of
Christ's house. As a presbyter he always respected the
constitution of his Church, and resisted all efforts to
run over it, or to go around it.

Women were not eligible to the sacred office. Not
because they were intellectually inferior. Not because
they were deficient in piety. He often poured forth
streams of matchless eloquence in praise of "those
women which labored with us in the gospel." But
Scripture had not laid this burden upon them. In
mothering the race they were carrying their full share
of the tasks and responsibilities of life. It would be
inequitable to impose upon them the work of the minis-

218 The Life Work of

try. To suffer them to assume it, in their zeal for the
cause, would be ungallant. It was a man's task. It
was a man's duty. The apostle, in forbidding women
to speak in mixed assemblies, was not arbitrary, nor
cynical towards the sex, but chivalrously protecting
them.

Having himself been a missionary to the negroes, Dr.
Girardeau had an abiding and enthusiastic concern in
all the foreign and domestic missionary enterprises of
the Church. He and his session and congregation of
the Glebe Street Church in Charleston did a wonder-
ful work in saving the churches of the seaboard of
South Carolina after the desolations. of the Civil War.
On the floor of ecclesiastical bodies he often lifted up
his voice in rousing speeches and proposed policies in
behalf of all the extension work of the Redeemer's
kingdom. In this connection he gave much time and
thought to the powers of the evangelist, which was
mooted in Church circles. He held that the evangelist
was a minister extraordinary, especially commissioned
in view of unorganized conditions. He was not a bare
preacher, or revivalist. He had in his single person the
authority of a presbytery. There were limits, however.
As soon as he had organized a session, the most elemen-
tary court in the Presbyterian system, he could not be a
bishop over it, but must be subordinate to it. In a
foreign country such a session must be regarded as the
nucleus of a Presbyterian Church — an embryonic pres-
bytery, synod and assembly. He was watchful against
the slightest movements in the direction of an episco-
pacy. Power could be put into the hands of a single
individual only for extraordinary purposes, and as soon
as the circumstances changed the power must lapse
back to the principal.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 219

He held to the official parity of elders and preachers.
During his day this was a topic of live debate. Some
thought that the preacher held an official rank above
the ruling elder — making a kind of house of lords in
the Church. He participated in this discussion, and did
yeoman's service in making triumphant the official
equality of teaching elder, or preacher, and the ruling
elder. They were officers of the same rank. They had
the same functions. Each was a teacher. Each was a
ruler. It was the stated business of the preacher to
expound and instruct in the gospel. The elder was to
preach as occasion called for it, but it was not his set
employment. Each was to rule, but conjointly in the
session and in other courts. No power of government
vested in the preacher as preacher. He was entitled to
"double honor" only because he was supposed to exer-
cise the twin functions of his office, preaching and rul-
ing, in a manner especially praiseworthy. He denied
that the office of preacher included the office of elder as
the higher includes the lower. The office is one, the
functions are two, preaching and ruling ; each holder of
the office may exercise both its functions.

A controversy began in the undivided Church prior
to the Civil War over boards and committees. Boards
were commissions; their actions, within their spheres,
were as final as if they had been taken by the original
bodies. Committees were held to be agents of the body
appointing them; their actions were always subject to
review, and were never final until they had been ap-
proved or disapproved by the appointing body. Thorn-
well led the opposition to boards. He argued that
Christ had given power to his Church, laid upon it a
duty and responsibility, and that it could never dele-
gate this power and responsibility to any other agency.

220 The Life Work of

As against boards he favored executive committees. Dr.
Girardeau stood with Thornwell, and held that no body
could create another body that would be independent
of the original. As a presbyter, he helped to set up the
scheme of executive committees in the Southern Church,
none of whose actions are final without the imprint of
the General Assembly.

During the life-time of Dr. Girardeau, the Church
undertook the complete revision of its Book of Church
Order — that part of its general Constitution which
prescribes the principles of its government and discip-
line. While this project began in the undivided
Church, and, as completed, was the product of many
hands. Dr. John B. Adger, more than any one person,
was the father of the New Book of Order. Dr. Girar-
deau was his close friend, and fellow -laborer upon its
preparation. He discussed many of its propositions
upon the floor of Presbytery, Synod, and Assembly.
The clearness of his expositions, and the ability of his
advocacy, contributed to the final triumph. It was
not, however, as satisfactoiy as he desired. He
thought some of its matters and prescriptions ought
to be plainer. And the frequent overtures for changes
in it, which have marked the subsequent history of the
Church under it, confirm the correctness of his judg-
ment. Xevertheless, he thought it a vast improvement
upon the old ante-bellum statement of ecclesiastical
law and order.

He felt that the theory of the Church, of the min-
istry, and of the elder had been made sufficiently clear,
but he did not think that the status of the evangelist
and the deacon had been made as obvious as it ought
to be. He became especially interested in the deacon's
case. The Synod of South Carolina in 1877 appointed

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 221

him on a committee to digest the subject, and submit
to it a report of the biblical doctrine of the deacon,
with a view to a better statement on this officer. He
did an immense amount of reading and thinking.
There were those who thought the office of preacher
included that of elder and deacon. There were others
who thought the office of elder took up within itself
the office of deacon. The general opinion minified this
office and officer. He was being treated as a kind of
subordinate servant of the preacher and the elder —
scarcely more than a mere financial clerk.

The result of his labors was an elaborate report, in
three sections. The first was presented to the Synod
in 1878, the second in 1879, and the third in 1880.
They were printed as articles, successively, in the
Southern Presbyterian Review for the years 1879,
1880, and 1881.

The office of deacon was magnified. It was a dis-
tinct office in the Christian organization, instituted
by Christ. It is not included in the presbyterate, as
the lower is included in the higher. The minister is
not, ex officio^ moderator of the board of deacons. The
elder is not, ex officio^ a collector and distributor of
church money. The deacon is the minister of finance
in the kingdom of Christ. He ought to be the collector
of all funds, the treasurer of all monies, the trustee of
all property. He must look after all the temporal
affairs of the Church, while the elders look after its
spiritual concerns. There are, however, no "deacons'
courts." The}^ possess no potestas jurisdictianis. That
is vested in the session, whose government is over the
entire organization. The board of deacons is a "ways
and means committee." It may advise, but it cannot
veto the session. It can recommend financial meas-

222 The Life Work of

ures, but it cannot execute them, without authority
from the session. Two independent authorities in the
same organization must end in collision and confusion.

Dr. J. A. Lefever of Baltimore combatted the views
of Dr. Girardeau. He held that the higher office of
elder included the lower office of deacon. And here
the matter rests to this day — uncleared and unsettled.
The deacon is still wondering what are his powers,
and what his duties. Does the Church need a finan-
cial officer, and a financial system? And has Christ
instituted the office of deacon for this very purpose —
to provide the ways and means of his kingdom in the
earth? Are we to go on in reliance upon all manner
of human inventions? Must we hold out our cap to
any hand, and resort to any method which will yield
us pennies ? Shall we put in the Seminary curriculum
a course in Church finance, and try to make expert
financiers, and expert preachers, and expert rulers,
out of the same young men? Or shall we make the
deacons finance the Lord's work in the world ?

Upon the subject of the diaconate. Dr. Girardeau
laid down these propositions:

"1. The functions of the deacon are important as freeing the
ministry and eldership from engrossment in the temporal busi-
ness of the Church, and enabling them to concentrate their
energies upon their own spiritual duties.

"2. The deacon's office is important in its bearing upon the
support of the ministry.

"3. The deacon's office is important to the prosecution of the
benevolent enterprises and the support of the institutions of
the Church.

"4. The full employment of the deacon's office is important
in its bearing upon the perfect conformity of our whole system
of church order practically, as well as theoretically, to the
pattern shown us in the Mount."

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 223

Suppose the whole body of our ministers and elders
were devoted to converting and edifying sinners, and
the magnificent body of deacons were devoted to
financing the enterprise ! It at least sounds thrilling.

Dr. Girardeau's great report on the Diaconate was,
by the direction of that body, submitted to the General
Assembly. After some years of postponing, and inci-
dental consideration of it, it was finally printed in the
appendix of its minutes.

In 1880 the General Assembly met in Charleston.
I was a student of the Theological Seminary in
Columbia, and went down to the old city by the sea,
to gaze upon this great gathering of the distinguished
fathers of the Church. The meeting was in the Sec-
ond Presbyterian Church. Dr. T. A. Hoyt was the
Moderator. I heard a great debate, the greatest I have
heard, except the one in the Synod of South Carolina
at Greenville, when evolution was the bone of contro-
versy. The issue at Charleston was over the nature
of the in thesi deliverances of church courts. The pre-
vious Assembly at Louisville in 1879 had said that all
such deliverances were "only didactic, advisory, and
monitory." The Synod of South Carolina asked the
Charleston Assembly to "repeal, or at least seriously
modify," this pronouncement.

Dr. Girardeau championed the overture. For over
two hours he was heard with transfixed attention and
admiration. His reasoning was ablaze, and his flights
of eloquence were sublime. The historian of the occa-
sion (Dr. Adger), who was present, wrote, "It is not
often such logic set on fire is heard in any Church
Assembly." Dr. Girardeau's powers at the time and
for the occasion were full-orbed. He was on his native
heath, and in a building which reeked with boyhood-

224 The Life Work of

memories, and was clustered about by a thousand hal-
lowed associations. He was before the Assembly of
the Church of his love, and the spokesman for the
Synod to which he had been devoted all his life. The
issue was serious in his judgment, and bulked large
in his concern. The very power of the Church to
declare truth and maintain order had been eviscerated.
The authority which had been unwittingly taken away
must be recovered. Every thing challenged him to
his mightiest and his best. He rose to the occasion
in all the grandeur of discourse. Impersonal in all
his utterances, his speech marred by no ungenerous
flings, and tainted by no biting invectives, he held to
the issue, and pleaded his cause like a statesman stand-
ing on a mountain top. He analyzed and expounded,
argued and reasoned, clothed his thought in lofty dic-
tion and gorgeous rhetoric, and uttered it Avith the
elocution of a natural artist.

He held that the in thesi deliverances of the Assem-
bly were not mere advice, to be treated by its con-
stituency as it pleased. He denied that they were the
mere opinions of a Congregational Association. Such
pronouncements were to be respected as the decisions
of the supreme court of the Church of Christ on earth.
They were to be submitted to, when consonant with
the Word of God. They were not private interpreta-
tions, but official expositions. True, the Church had
its standards, its Confession of Faith, but when con-
trary interpretations were put upon the statements
of this formulary, who has the final decision as to the
real meaning? All synods and councils might err;
nothing was infallible but Scripture itself; but the
Church, in its highest Assembly, had the authority
and must take the responsibility of interpreting the

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 225

meaning of its own fundamental law. He did not hold
that the Assembly had the right to make law, to form-
ulate a constitution, but that it did have the right to
give a final interpretation of its ow^n constitution.
Such interpretations were to be respected and sub-
mitted to, unless one, in the exercise of his right of
private judgment, should take upon himself the
responsibility of declaring them to be contrary to the
Word of God. In that case, he could seek a repeal or
modification of the deliverance, or, in the last resort,
he could secede from the organization. He was strug-
gling to maintain the force and respect of the Assem-
bly as the highest court of the Church.

Dr. James Woodrow, his colleague in the Columbia
Seminary, and Dr. H. M. Smith, an editor of New
Orleans, replied to the speech in arguments that were
acute and able. Each spoke as long. They did not
display the entrancing eloquence of Dr. Girardeau,
but there was a simplicity and clearness in their dis-
cussions, which made them very charming and illumi-
nating. Dr. Woodrow's main point was that in thesi
deliverances could not be made the premises of judicial
prosecutions; offences must be charged under the text
of the constitutional laAv, and not under any Assem-
bly's interpretation of that text; consequently what-
ever else might be said about such deliverances, in
their praise or condemnation, they were at bottom
"only didactic, advisory, and monitory." The burden
of Dr. Smith's argument was, that Dr. Girardeau's
doctrine of in thesi deliverances would cause to grow
up, beside the constitution and outside the constitu-
tion, a body of laws made by the Assemblies; authori-
tative interpretations of law would themselves have
the force of law; we would presently have the consti-

226 The Life Work of

tution loaded down with commentaries and exposi-
tions of it, as binding as the text itself ; hence the only
safety was in treating i^i thesi deliverances as "only
didactic, advisory, and monitory."

On the ninth day of the session Dr. Girardeau made
a rejoinder to both the preceding speakers. In reply
to Dr. Woodrow, he admitted that judicial proceed-
ings could initiate only against such offenses as were
charged under the text of the constitution, but con-
tended that the very text of the constitution provided
that some matters could be settled in some other mode
than by judicial process. Our lower courts are empow-
ered to overture Assemblies, and Assemblies are
authorized "to determine controversies of faith and
cases of conscience." Judicial decisions are but appli-
cations of the Word of God to a particular case; why
should not such decisions be just as forceful, if imper-
sonallj^ applied to precisely the same matter? In
reply to Dr. Smith, he contended that, if judicial
decisions are concrete precedents, why should not in
'thesi deliverances be general precedents? The ques-
tion was not as to the power of the Assembly to make
law, but to interpret the law already made. In both
speeches he contended that the Assembly had no power
to make law, but affirmed that it had the power to
interpret law already made, particularly by judicial
decisions and generally by in thesi decisions.

At the conclusion of this rejoinder. Dr. Woodrow
arose and offered the following paper, which was pre-
pared by Dr. Adger, promptly seconded by Dr. Girar-
deau, and adopted by the Assembly:

"1. Nothing is law to be enforced by judicial prosecution but
that which is contained in the Word as interpreted in our
standards.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 227

"2. The judicial decisions of our courts differ from their in
thesi deliverances in that the former determine, and, when
proceeding from our highest court, conclude a particular case.
But both these kinds of decisions are alike interpretations of
the Word by a church court, and both not only deserve high
consideration, but both must be submitted to, unless contrary
to the Constitution and the Word; of which there is a right
of private judgment belonging to every church court, and also
every individual church member."

By the adjournment of the Assembly the discussion
was rife as to the interpretation of this very paper.
Some said it meant one thing, some said it meant
another. The Synod of South Carolina asked the next
Assembly, meeting at Staunton, Virginia, to define its
meaning. After consideration. Dr. B. M. Palmer
offered the following, which was adopted almost
unanimously :

"To the overture of the Synod of South Carolina the Assem-
bly returns answer that all just and necessary consequences
from the law of the Church are part of the same in the logical
sense of being implicitly contained therein. The authority of
this law is, however, twofold. It binds all those who profess
to live under it as a covenant by which they are united in one
communion, so there is no escape from its control, except by
renouncing its jurisdiction; and it binds because it has been
accepted as a true expression of what is revealed in the Holy
Scriptures as infallible truth. The consequences deduced from
it cannot, therefore, be equal in authority with the law itself,
unless they be necessarily contained within it, as shown by
their agreement also with the Divine Word."

Commenting upon this vexed question, and upon
this last ambiguous decision of the Assembly, Dr.
R. L. Dabney wrote, "a church government at once
free and Presbyterian (as opposed to the mere advis-
ory action of congregational associations) cannot be
excogitated, without admitting the principle claimed

228 The Life Work of

by the South Carolina Synod." The illustrious Vir-
ginian was right. Suppose a member charged with
an oifence under the very text of the standards. But
that text itself is of doubtful interpretation. Who,
but the supreme court of the Church can resolve that
doubt? Some such decision is necessary to make pos-
sible the settlement of the litigation.

This whole question had originated in precisely this
manner. A judicial case had started in Atlanta. A
member had been disciplined for participating in what
is called "worldly amusement." The case had made
its way to the General Assembly. The whole hinge of
this matter was whether the standards did, or did not,
inhibit the thing alleged in the indictment. Quoad
Tiocy what was the meaning of the law? It needed to
be interpreted, before it could be applied for acquittal
or conviction. The facts were admitted by both
parties. The dispute was over the scope and meaning
of the law. Under one interpretation, no offence had
been committed; under the other interpretation, a
serious offence had been committed. Who is to decide
the matter of meaning? When the judicial case was
out of the way, the General Assembly was asked the
question, Who has authority to decide between dis-
putes as to the meaning of the standards? The Louis-
ville Assembly answered, that "all in thesi deliver-
ances are only didactic, advisory, and monitory." This
was tantamount to saying that there is no way in the
Presbyterian Church to decide the meaning of a dis-
puted law, whereas its Constitution gives the final
power to the General Assembly, "to determine con-
troversies of faith and cases of conscience." Towards
such a "determination," the first step is the making of
a law; and this has been done by the entire Church,

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 229

and written as its Constitution. The next step is the
interpretation of this written law; and this is left to
the courts of the Church, the final decision in the series
being with the General Assembly.

If the General Assembly, in exercising its right of
construing the law, being fallible, wrongs a member,
he must submit to injury, or exercise his primal right
of withdrawing from its jurisdiction. This would be
the case, whether the decision was judicial or in ihesi.
Without the power to interpret, no business could be
transacted.

Dr. Girardeau reflected much upon the subject of
the Church and Education. It was not easy for him
to see a perfectly clear and self-consistent position and
policy. Had it any lawful right in the school-house?
Had it a biblical commission to teach Latin and Greek,
mathematics and science, or any departments of mere
culture ? Was not its sole topic the Christian religion,
its one text-book the Bible? It seemed so.

Hence, for the greater part of his life, he stood with
Thornwell, and held that education was a function of
the State and not of the Church. During this period
his sympathies Avith church-schools were weak. But
on the floor of the Synod of South Carolina, meeting
in Yorkville in 1890, he announced his conversion
from State-schools to Church-schools, he made a
speech forcefully developing the following four con-
trolling reasons, taken from his manuscript notes :

"1. Our children belong to Christ, and must be educated for
His service and glory.

"2. We are Presbyterian Christians, and must educate our
children in Presbyterian Christianity.

"3. The State is tending to exclude Bible-religion from her
institutions, and necessarily excludes Presbyterianism. We are

230 The Life Work of

bound, therefore, to create and patronize our own institutions.

"4. If religion is to be taught, its teachers must be held
responsible to Boards, which are themselves responsible to
bodies above them and capable of controlling them. The only
such bodies available are Church-courts."

He never had any misgivings about the Scriptural
right of the Church to found and operate Theological
Seminaries. An educated ministry was a first desider-
atum, and a plain biblical duty. Such training could
best be given in theological schools, founded and oper-
ated for this specific purpose. But he was clear that
the curriculum of such schools ought to embrace only
such subjects as were directly germain to a prepara-
tion for the gospel ministry. He never saw his way
clear to expanding the seminary into a religious uni-
versity.

These things show us how intensely interested in
the subject of ecclesiolog^^ Dr. Girardeau was. He
labored for a clear and consistent system of order,
even as he did for a harmonious doctrine of faith. He
sought for the principles that were at the bottom. He
was always willing for their logical application every-
where. He took a large part in the discussion of
ecclesiastical questions. He had an abiding interest in
the affairs of his Church. He gave liberally of his
time and abilities and counsels, in all the efforts of
his associates to see clearly and act wisely. He was
passionately loyal to his denomination, yet catholic
and evangelical in his spirit. He was opposed to the
reunion of the Southern and Xorthern Churches,
because he felt that they were divided by principles
and policies, sympathies and sentiments, and could
best cooperate, peaceably and effectively, in promoting
the common cause of Christ, in separate organizations.

He was an eminent and arduous, a faithful and
painstaking Presbyter.

CHAPTER VIII

THE EVOLUTION CONTROVERSY

By R. A. Webb, D. D., LL. D.

In 1883 a controversy over the doctrine of Evolu-
tion began in the Southern Presbyterian Church,
which lasted for eight distressing years. Dr. Girar-
deau took a prominent part in this controversy.

This denomination had at Columbia, South Caro-
lina, a Theological Seminary for the training of young
men for the Gospel ministry. This school was under
the control of the four Synods of South Carolina,
Georgia, Alabama and Florida, themselves subordi-
nate bodies under the General Assembly of the Pres-
byterian Church in the United States. These Synods
administered the affairs of this institution through a
Board of Directors, chosen by themselves, and which
made annual reports to the controlling Synods.

This Theological Seminary was unique in that it was
the only institution of its kind which had a chair
specially endowed, and devoted to the exposition of the
relations between Natural Science and Revelation.
This chair had been occupied, since its foundation in
1861, by Dr. James Woodrow, a distinguished scholar
and eminent ecclesiastic.

There first began to be irresponsible whisperings
about Dr. Woodrow 's soundness in the faith; specifi-
cally about his attitude toward the hypothesis of Evo-
lution. It was being hinted that he had changed from
an opponent to a friend of this hypothesis.

At its annual meeting in May, 1883, the Board of
Directors adopted the following paper:

232 The Life Work of

"Whereas this Seminary is the only one in our Southern
Church that has the chair of 'Natural Science in Connexion
with Revelation', and

"Whereas 'during the senior year the question of the Unity
and Antiquity of the Human Race and Evolution are fully
examined', and

"Whereas skepticism in the world is using alleged discoveries
in science to impugn the word of God ;

''Therefore he it Resolved, That this Board request Professor
Dr. James Woodrow to give fully his views, as taught in this
institution, upon Evolution, as it respects the world, the lower
animals, and man, in the October number of the Southern Pres-
byterian Review, or as soon thereafter as possible."

Dr. Woodrow prepared the statement of his views
requested by the Board, and delivered it as an address
before the Ahimni Association in May, 1884, and pub-
lished it in the Southern Preshterian Review in July
of the same year.

In this address the Professor guardedly committed
himself to the evolutionary origin of the world, the
lower animals, and man as to his body only.

A sensation was created. The address was the sub-
ject of private comment and of public remark in the
secular and ecclesiastical press. Some thought his
views were permissible in a theological seminary;
others thought them improper and to be forbidden.
Lines at once began to be drawn. The Board of
Directors adopted (a minority protesting) a minute
permitting in the Seminary the views expressed in the
address.

The report of the Board and the address came up
regularly before the Synod of South Carolina, which
met at Greenville in that State in the fall of 1884.
The matter was referred by this Synod to a special
committee to report at that session as speedily as pos-

JoHX L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 238

sible. This committee divided and brought in two
reports, majority and minority.
The majority report :

"1. That the hypothesis of evolution respecting the earth, the
lower animals, and man's body, being a purely scientific and
extra scriptural theory, the church, as such, is not called upon
to make any deliverance concerning its truth or falsity.

"2. That the church being set for the defence of the gospel
and the promulgation of scriptural doctrines, can never, with-
out transcending her proper sphere, incorporate into her Con-
fession of Faith any of the hypotheses, theories or systems of
human science.

"3. That while the presentation of the hypothesis of evolution
in its relations to Scripture falls necessarily within the scope
of the duties pertaining to the Perkins Professorship, neverthe-
less, neither this nor any other scientific hypothesis is, or can
be, taught in our Theological Seminary as an article of church
faith.

"4. That, in view of the above considerations, the Synod sees
no suflicient reason to interfere with the present order of our
Theological Seminary as determined by the Board of Directors."

The minority report:

"1. That the question, whether Dr. Woodrow's views involve
heresy, is not before the Synod.

"2. That the Synod was not called on to decide the question
whether the views of Dr. Woodrow contradict the Bible in its
highest and most absolute sense, but whether they contradict
the interpretations of the Bible by the Presbyterian Church in
the United States.

"3. That the declaration of the Board of Directors, that 'the
relations subsisting between the teachings of Scripture and the
teachings of natural science are plainly, correctly, and satis-
factorily set forth' in Dr. Woodrow's address on evolution, was
inexpedient and injudicious.

"4. That the action of the Board of Directors virtually
approving the inculcation and defence of the said hypothesis,
even as a probable one, in the Theological Seminary, as being

234 Tpie Life Work or

contrary to the interpretation of the Scriptures by our cliurch
and to her prevailing and recognized view, is, a majority of
the associated Synods concurring, hereby prohibited."

A great debate ensued. It lasted for five days. A
member of Congress, who heard it, told me at its close,
that, for ability, dignity and force, he had never heard
its equal in the Senate of the United States. On one
side were Dr. J. S. Cozby, Dr. J. B. Adger, Dr. C. E.
Hemphill, Dr. J. L. Martin, Dr. G. R. Brackett, Dr.
W. J. McKay, Hon. W. A. Clark, and Dr. James
Woodrow. On the other were Dr. J. B. Mack, Dr.
W. F. Junkin, Dr. W. T. Thompson, Dr. C. S. Vedder,
Dr. H. E. Shepherd, Dr. H. B. Pratt, R. A. Webb, and
Dr. J. L. Girardeau. The last named had been a
devoted and illustrious member of this Synod all his
life, and was an alumnus of, and a professor in, the
Columbia Seminary, and cherished a passionate love
for his State and his Church, for his Synod and his
Seminary. He made two speeches on the occasion, tlie
substance of which was subsequently printed in a
pamphlet, which is here reproduced, because it shows
the position which he held, and the object for which
he contended to the very end of the long and weary
controversy which followed.

THE SUBSTANCE OF TWO SPEECHES ON THE

TEACHING OF EVOLUTION IN COLUMBIA

THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY.

Delivered in the Synod of South Carolina, at Greenville, S. C,
October, 1884, by John L. Girardeau, D. D.

Prefatory Note. — At a meeting of the Board of Directors of
Columbia Theological Seminary, held in September, the Address
of Dr. James Woodrow on Evolution was submitted to them by
him for their consideration. By a majority of. 8 to 3, the Board
took the following action :

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 235

The Board having carefully considered the address of Dr.
Woodrow, published in pursuance of the request of this Board,
adopts the following :

1st. Resolved, That the Board does hereby tender to Dr.
Woodrow its thanks for the ability and faithfulness with whicli
he has complied with its request.

2d. That in the judgment of this Board the relations subsist-
ing between the teachings of Scripture and the teachings of
natural science are plainly, correctly and satisfactorily set forth
in said address.

3d. That the Board is not prepared to concur in the view
expressed by Dr. Woodrow as to the probable method of the
creation of Adam's body— yet, in the judgment of the Board,
there is nothing in the doctrine of evolution, as defined and
limited by him, which appears inconsistent with perfect sound-
ness in the faith.

4th. That the Board takes this occasion to record its deep
and ever growing sense of the wisdom of our Synods in the
establishment of the chair of "the Perkins Professorship of
Natural Science in Connexion with Revelation," and of the
importance of such instruction as is thereby afforded, that our
ministry may be the better prepared to resist the objections of
infidel scientists and defend the Scriptures against their insid-
ious charges.

Against this action the minority entered the following pro-
test:

1. Evolution is an unproved hypothesis, and the Seminary is
not the place for such teaching.

2. Belief in evolution changes the interpretation of many pas-
sages of Scripture from that now received by the Church.

3. The view that the body of Adam was evolved from lower
animals, and not formed by a supernatural act of God, is dan-
gerous and hurtful.

4. The theory that Adam's body was formed by the natural
law of evolution, while Eve's was created by a supernatural act
of God, is contrary to our confession of faith as that confession
of faith has been and is interpreted by our Church.

5. The advocacy of views which have received neither the
endorsement of the Board nor that of the Synods havmg control
of the Seminary, which have not been established by science,
which have no authority from the Word of God, which tend to

236 The Life Work of

unsettle the received interpretation of many passages of Scrip-
ture and to destroy the confidence of the Church in her doc-
trinal standards, which have already produced so much evil,
and which will injure the Seminary and may rend our Church,
ought not to he alloived.

The report of the Board having been submitted to the Synod
of South Carolina, was referred to a Standing Committee on
the Theological Seminary. That committee presented a majority
and minority report.

*******

The question was on the adoption of the majority report.
The greater part of the ensuing remarks is a reproduction
verbatim of what was spoken from full notes on the floor of
the Synod. The same verbal accuracy is not vouched for in
regard to the whole of them. It is not the writer's intention to
invite controversy. He has consented to the publication of the
speech, partly because it was very inadequately reported, and
partly because it enounces principles which, it is humbly con-
ceived, may prove of some benefit to the Church.

After some introductory remarks, in which he expressed his
reluctance to oppose a colleague with whom he had for eight
years been associated, his appreciation of Dr. Woodrow's tran-
scendent abilities as a teacher, and the obligation imposed upon
him by his position as a presbyter and a member of the Synod
to utter his convictions upon the subject under consideration,
the speaker proceeded to say :

Mr. Moderator : — The question is not before this Synod
whether Dr. Woodrow is liable to the charge of heresy.

In the first place, the Synod is directly dealing with the
action of the Board of Directors, which in due order comes
before it for consideration. But there is no evidence furnished
by the report of the Board, that any charge or allegation of
heretical teaching on the part of Dr. Woodrow was laid before
them. Consequently they did not consider such an accusation.
The question of heresy was not properly before them, and as
we have to do with the proceedings of the Board that question
is not properly before us. Allegations to the effect that Dr.
Woodrow teaches heretical doctrine have been made by certain
newspapers and individuals ; and were it proper for this Synod
to notice such statements, I would, as one of its members, favor

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 237

its vindication of liim against tliem. We are, however, not
directly concerned about outside and irresponsible allegations,
but about the official action of the Board of Directors and the
matters with which it specifically dealt.

In the second place, I believe — although others may differ
with me on this point — that there is no ground in fact upon
which a charge of heresy in this case could be based, and there-
fore no ground for the raising of the question by this body.

We have been referred by one of the speakers for a definition
of heresy to our Book of Discipline, Chapter III. That chapter
defines offenses, which are objects of judicial process, and
declares that "general offenses are heresies or immoralities."
But as no specific difference of heresy is here indicated, no
definition is furnished. It is evident that we must look else-
where for a definition of heresy.

Nor will it do to say that heresy is that which is contrary to
the Scriptures and our Doctrinal Standards. No doubt all
heresy is contrary to the Scriptures and our Standards, but all
that is so characterized is not necessarily heresy. There are
degrees of opposition to the Scriptures and the Standards, and
of some of them we are not warranted in affirming that they
are heretical. Take as an example a single case. Our Stand-
ards, professing to found their doctrine on the subject upon the
teachings of the Scriptures, deliver the post-millennial view of
the second advent of Christ. Would we stigmatise as heretics
the brethren among us who hold the pre-millennial view,
because that tenet is contrary to the Confession of Faith inter-
preting the Scriptures?

What, then, is heresy, according to our conception? It
involves a serious departure either from the fundamental ele-
ments of the gospel, or what is the same thing the scheme of
redemption, or from the vital doctrines of the Calvinistic The-
ology.* This is the definition of heresy accepted by our theo-
logians, and tried by this standard I fail to see how Dr. Wood-
row's views can be pronounced heretical. He denies no funda-
mental element of the gospel scheme ; but, on the contrary,
professes cordially to hold every one of them. And it would
be a difficult task to show how his views, in themselves con-

♦These terms were used in a wide sense as including what is common
to Calvinism and orthodoxy as well as what is pecular to it.

238 The Life Work of

sidered apart from his professions, logically contravene any
essential part of the scheme of redemption. He denies no vital
doctrine of the Calvinistic Theology; but, on the other hand,
professes to maintain every one of them. He avows himself a
theist, holds that God originally created matter out of nothing,
and that he immediately created the human soul in the first
instance. He expressly asserts the doctrine of a conciirsus of
Divine Providence with all the forces and processes of nature.
He affirms his belief in the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures
and in all the miracles which they record, including the mirac-
ulous production of the human nature of our incarnate Lord ;
and, in fine, in all the facts, whether miraculous or otherwise,
of the gospel history and of the scheme of redemption. He also
professes his acceptance of the federal headship of Adam, in
answer to those who have charged his views with involving a
rejection of that doctrine. I am not able to perceive, therefore,
how his teaching can be adjudged to be heretical. Whether it
contradicts the Scriptures, and, if so, in what sense, are ques-
tions which will be considered in the progress of this argument.

The question which is before the Synod is, whether it will
approve or disapprove the action of the Board of Directors, and,
by implication, the inculcation of Dr. Woodrow's hypothesis of
evolution in the Theological Seminary.

The action of the Board, so far as it fairly comes before us
for consideration, consists of two parts : first, the endorsement
of Dr. Woodrow's exposition of the relations between the Bible
and Natural Science as plain, correct and satisfactory ; secondly,
the judgment that Dr. Woodrow's hypothesis of evolution is
consistent with perfect soundness in the faith, and, by necessary
inference, the Board's consent to its being inculcated in the
Theological Seminary.

I. — I proceed to assign some reasons why this Synod should
not give its formal approval to the first element of the action
of the Board, to which attention has been cited.

1. The question of the relations between the Bible and science
is one which has long been discussed, and one which demands
the most mature and careful treatment. There was no urgent
reason requiring the Board to pass their official judgment upon
that difficult subject. They might have left Dr. Woodrow's
exposition to speak for Itself upon its own merits. Nor is there
any evidence that in the joint deliberations of the Board this

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 239

particular question received a consideration proportionate to its
importance. For aught ttiat appears, their decision in regard
to it was of the nature of a snap judgment. The difficulties
inherent in the subject, and the high position of the Board of
Directors as the custodians, and in some measure the exponents,
of a correct theology, rendered unwise so dogmatic and sweep-
ing a judgment as was embodied in their action. I trust, there-
fore, that the Synod will either express its sense of the injudi-
ciousness of that decision, or at least refrain from giving it its
solemn approval.

2. There are, in my humble judgment, certain defects in the
exposition of the relations between the Bible and science, which
should have induced the Board to hesitate before pronouncing
so absolute a judgment as that it is plain, correct and satis-
factory.

(1.) The proposition that "the Bible does not teach science,"
although in an important sense true, is yet in some degree
vague and ambiguous, and needed further qualification than is
Imposed upon it in the exposition. It is not my intention to
criticise its author in regard to this matter. It may be admitted
that it was impracticable, within the limits of a single discourse
so wide in its range, to give this particular proposition any
fuller elucidation than was actually furnished. I make this
statement in order to evince the inexpediency of the Board's
unrestricted declaration that the exposition was satisfactory.
But this point is not of great consequence in the present discus-
sion. We may concede the truth of the proposition in the sense
intended by its maintainers, and nothing material will be gained
or lost on one side or the other.

(2.) Another difficulty is occasioned by the assertion in the
exposition of a marked difference between non-contradiction
and harmony. The position is definitely taken that we are not
to expect harmony, but merely non-contradiction, between the
statements of the Bible and those of science. Now a distinction
is obvious and necessary — namely, between the cases in which
the respective statements do, and those in which they do not,
relate to the same thing. But the illustrative cases mentioned
in the exposition are those in which different classes of state-
ments do not relate, or are not apt to relate, to the same thing.
"We do not speak," says the author, "of the harmony of math-
ematics and chemistry, or of zoology and astronomy, or the

240 The Life Work of

reconciliation of physics and metaphysics." Here the object-
matter of the sciences specified is so different that there is but
little chance of conflict. The statements do not terminate upon
the same things, and, therefore, no harmony of positive state-
ment is to be expected.

Our question is a different one. It arises in regard to those
cases in which the Bible and science speak about the same
thing — in which the object-matter is, in some sense, the same.
Here there is a chance of conflict ; and the question of harmony
or disharmony becomes pertinent. Tlie distinction which has
been emphasized is one that cannot be overlooked.

But even in those cases in which the object-matter of the
statements differs, the inquiry occurs, is all harmony excluded?
Every truth is, in some sense, harmonious with every other
truth. It constitutes a part of a system the constituent ele-
ments of which are consistent with each other. All truth tends
to unity. There is a common relation which it sustains to God
as at once its author and its end. The word and the works of
God concur in illustrating His perfections and subserving His
glory, "The heavens declare the glory of God and the firma-
ment showeth his handy-work," and the Bible echoes these
sublime lessons and gives them an articulate utterance. Nature
and Redemption combine to swell the volume of praise which
ascends to their common author ; and science, unless it could
establish a claim to be Godless, should harmonize with religion
in laying its offerings of worship upon a common altar. Fur-
ther than this, I make bold to say, the Bible and science sustain
a common relation to Christ the Mediator. However they may
now differ in conse<:iuence of the disturbing influence of sin,
they are destined ultimately to come into harmony at his cross
and to kiss each other there. Their absolute divorce is illegiti-
mate. What God has, in a certain sense, joined together, let
not man put asunder. I fear this doctrine of a total separation
of the Bible and science. But if, as has been briefly intimated,
there is, or ought to be, some harmony between them, all har-
mony cannot be excluded.

Let us, however, come to the question more immediately
before us : Are we to expect only non-contradiction and not
harmony, where the Bible and science make statements about
the same thing — for example, the origin of Adam's body? The
exposition lays down this as a principle ; and this has been

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 241

regarded as a great discovery. Would that it were! It would
be an honor to the author, to our Seminary and to our Church.
No more conflict would be possible between the Bible and
science. A permanent peace would be established between them
— "a consummation devoutly to be wished." But I fear more is
promised than can be performed.

The hope that a principle has been discovered which will
hereafter render impossible a conflict between scientific men
and the Bible, namely, the potent principle of non-contradiction,
will prove to be a charming but delusive dream. As well might
we hope to discover a principle, the formulation of which would
arrest the conflict between the Bible and the Devil. Sir, ever
since the fall of man, there have been two parties in this poor,
sinful world that are in irreconcilable conflict with each other ;
the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent ; the one
headed by a Divine-human Redeemer, the other by the arch-
conspirator against God and His elect church. Nor will that
conflict cease until the final apostasy has been developed, and
the hosts of Gog and Magog led by Satan shall hurl themselves
in one last, desperate assault against the camp of the saints.
Then shall that final blow of mediatorial power be struck which
will deliver the church from more than Egyptian tyranny, intro-
duce her into an everlasting rest, and put into her mouth the
triumphant song of Moses and the Lamb.

The exigencies of the discussion necessitate the examination
of the distinction, so broadly drawn, between non-contradiction
and harmony. Is it true that two statements may be non-con-
tradictory without being in some degree harmonious? There
are certain fundamental laws of thought which bear upon and
regulate all the processes of the thinking faculty. They are
the laws of Identity, Contradiction, or — as some prefer to call
it — Non-contradiction, and Excluded Middle or Third. These
laws are universally applicable. They do not, it is true, furnish
the matter of thought ; but, that being given, wherever the rela-
tions of affirmation and negation obtain between statements,
there they assert their control. And as the question before us
is one which is concerned about the relations between the state-
ments of science and those of the Bible, the appeal to their
authority becomes perfectly legitimate.

Now these laws are but specific explications of one ultimate
and generic principle, upon which they are reducible to unity.

242 The Life Work of

That principle is: All thought, to be valid, must be consistent,
or what is the same thing harmonious, with itself. Here is the
radical and underlying law of all valid thinking upon any sub-
ject— the Harmony of Thought with itself.

Let us apply the relation of this generic law to the specific
laws which have been indicated. Under the operation of the
law of Identity, the highest form is realised in which harmony
of thought can be manifested. A thing is equal to itself: a
thing is the same as itself: in these respective statements no
inconsistency is possible — complete harmony obtains. If two
statements upon any given subject are identical with each other,
absolute harmony is the result. The Bible, for example, says,
the sun shines : science says, the sun shines : These statements
being identical, perfect harmony exists. The Bible says, the
body of Adam was made of the dust of the ground : should
science say, the body of Adam was made of the dust of the
ground, there would be between these statements the harmony
of identity.

Under the operation of the second law, that of Contradiction,
two statements may be conceived as contradicting each other.
Here there is no harmony — there is the perfect absence of
harmony. The consequence is that thought is estopped from
proceeding further, until that impediment to harmony is
removed. Hence, some say — Sir William Hamilton, for instance
— that the law is really that of non-contradiction. For, where
two statements sustain simply the relation of non-contradiction,
there is, although not the highest, yet some, harmony between
them — the harmony, not of identity, but of non-contradiction.
The Bible says, the body of Adam was made of dust. Now, if
science should say, the body of Adam was not made of dust, the
two statements would be flatly contradictory, and there would
be the perfect absence of harmony between them. Or, if the
Bible be interpreted to mean that Adam's body was made of
inorganic dust, and science should afiirm that Adam's body was
not made of inorganic but organic dust, there would be a con-
tradiction between the two statements, and all harmony would
be excluded. But if the Bible says, Adam's body was made of
dust, without specifying the sort of dust, and science should
say, Adam's body was made of organic dust, it might be held,
as by some in this debate, that the two statements are not con-
tradictory— that there is between them simply the relation of

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 243

non-contradiction. In that case, the hindrance to harmony, it
might be contended, is, in a measure, removed. It might be
claimed, that there would exist between them the harmony
which consists with the absence of contradiction.

The third law — that of Excluded Middle or Third, requires
that where two statements contradict each other, one must be
held as true and the other as false. No middle or third suppo-
sition is possible. While this state of the case lasts, no
harmony of thought is possible. We must elect between the
contradictory alternatives. If, then, we reject one of the
contradictories as false and choose the other as true, we har-
monize our thinking with our previous thinking. The obstacle
to the progress of thought is taken away, and we move on har-
moniously with ourselves. For example again, if the Bible is
interpreted as saying, Adam's body was made of inorganic dust,
and science should say, Adam's body was made of organic dust,
we are confronted with contradictory statements. All harmony
is excluded, and while that contradiction remains in force all
progress of thought on the subject is blocked. We must, in
order to move on, elect between the contradictory statements.
This, of course, may be done in either of two ways. We may
reject the interpretation of the Bible, namely, that Adam's
body was made of inorganic dust, as the false alternative; and
then we would be shut up to accept as true the contradictory
scientific alternative, namely, that Adam's body was made of
organic dust. Or, on the other hand, we may reject the scientific
affirmation as false, and then we would be necessitated to accept
as true the biblical interpretation. In either case, we remove
the barrier to the progress of thought erected by the contra-
diction, and advance consistently with ourselves ; we reach that
harmony of thinking which is secured by the application of the
law of Excluded Middle.

From this analysis of the fundamental laws which regulate
all our thinking in regard to the relation of statements to each
other, it follows that where two affirmations referring to the
same subject are simply non-contradictory, there is not the com-
plete absence of harmony. The relation, it is true, does not
involve the harmony of identity, but still some harmony is
implied. What the author of the exposition of the relations
between the Bible and Science ought, in my judgment, to have
said is, Expect not the harmony of identity between them. That

244 The Life Work of

principle needed clear explication, and he has done good service
in calling attention to its importance. With that I have no
quarrel. But if he insist on meaning. Expect not harmony
between the statements of the Bible and those of Science, he
would throw himself in revolt against the fundamental laws of
all thinking. That principle would exclude what he labors to
establish, namely, the relation of non-contradiction between the
statements of the Bible and those of Science. He would defeat
his own intentions.

The author says : "We are not to look for harmony, but for
non-contradiction." The true view is : We are to look for the
harmony of non-contradiction. The principle which ought to
have been enounced and the enouncement of which — I say it
with all respect — must have been really intended, is, that where
the Bible and science speak about the same thing we are not to
look for the harmony of identical statement, but for the har-
mony of non-contradictory statements. This is a difficulty in
the exposition of the relations between the Bible and science
which should have deterred the Board of Directors from
declaring it to be plain, correct and satisfactory.

(3.) Another defect is, that when the exposition provided
for the case in which the church's interpretation of the Bibh^
is contradicted by a "proved truth of science," it ought, for
completeness' sake, to have noticed the complementary case in
which the church's interpretation of the Bible is contradicted
by a disproved assumption of science. The law, that of two
contradictories one is true and the other false, applies equally
to both cases. Does an interpretation of the Bible contradict a
proved truth of science? The interpretation is, of course, false,
and the Christian man should say: Let the interpretation go,
and admit the scientific truth. Does an interpretation of the
Bible contradict a disproved assumption of science? The
assumption is, of course, false, and the scientific man should
say : Let the assumption go, and admit the truth of the inter-
pretation. One of these things is as important as the other.
The exposition omits one, and favors the scientific side. It
does not make the demand upon it which it makes upon the
other side.

(4.) A fourth defect is, that the exposition makes no pro-
vision for cases in which the Bible and unproved scientific
hypotheses contradict one another. Will it be said, that th«

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 245

principle of non-contradiction is the only one which should be
considered as holding in those cases? Why, there not only may
be, but there are such contradictions. What is the reason of
the present agitation? Do not many in our church believe and
urge the existence of a contradiction between the Bible and Dr.
Woodrow's hypothesis of evolution? This is sufficient to show
that the principle of non-contradiction, although true under
limitations, is not broad enough to cover all cases of conflict.
The Board, for this reason also, acted unwisely in pronouncing
an authoritative judgment as to the satisfactoriness of the prin-
ciples set forth in the Address.

(5.) The last defect which I point out is, that the exposition
fails to define with accuracy the most important terms in the
discussion ; and to indicate the most common mode in which
conflicts occur between the Bible and science, and the way in
which they should be adjusted.

The term science, whatever may be said of the legitimacy of
the practice, is actually and ordinarily employed in different
senses. It is used to signify that which is true science; that
which is a true interpretation of the facts of nature. Consid-
ered in this, its highest and absolute sense, it is an accurate
registrar of those facts, derives from them good and necessary
inferences, and makes no mistake in its inductions and general-
izations. But we also apply the term to unverified hypotheses
in regard to the facts of nature and their relations. And still
further, men are accustomed to speak of hypotheses of science
which have been exploded; as when they speak of the scientific
hypothesis of Ptolemy. It may be said that in the two last
named instances the term is abusively employed. That is true,
but still it is employed, and will continue to be.

The same thing is true of the term theology, which may be
cited as an illustration. There is a true theology, a theology in
the highest and absolute sense; and it has been urged that to
use the term in any other sense is to employ it abusively. But
notwithstanding this, it is employed in senses in which those
who use it believe it to be false. So Calvinists are accustomed
to speak of the Armenian theology and Arminian theologians,
and Protestants have no hesitation in talking of the Romanist
theology and Romanist theologians.

The term Bible is also employed in widely different senses.
There is an absolute sense in which it is infallibly and un-

246 The Life Work of

changeably true. When we use the term in this sense, we
designate the meaning of the Scriptures which God Himself,
their author, intended them to convey. In emphasising this
signification, I am supported by Dr. Woodrow, in the Address
delivered at his inauguration as Perliins Professor in the Sem-
inary. "Believing firmly and cordially," he said, "that every
part of the Bible is the very word of God, and that, therefore,
every part of it is absolutely true, in the sense in which it was
the design of its real Author, the Holy Spirit, that it should be
understood," etc.

There is also a relative sense in which the word Bible is
obliged to be accepted — the sense in which it is the Bible rela-
tively to our apprehension of its meaning. The interpretations
which we honestly place upon it constitute it the Bible for us —
our ultimate standard of judgment in matters of faith and prac-
tice. Now these interpretations may or may not coincide with
the ahsolute meaning of the Bible. If they do, they are as
unchanging as that meaning itself. If they do not, they are a
fluctuating quantity, and are liable to be modified or even
abandoned. But whether or not the Church's interpretation of
the Bible be identical with its absolute and infallible meaning,
so long as she sincerely believes it so to be, it is the Bible to
her.

Let me illustrate this distinction by a reference to conscience
as the law of God impressed upon our moral constitution. Had
not man sinned his intellectual interpretation of the law given
in consequence would have coincided with the law itself. But
as he is a sinner, his intellectual judgments colored by the feel-
ings are liable to impose incorrect interpretations upon the law.
Here there is an absolute and a relative sense of the law of
conscience. Still although the relative and interpretative sense
may not coincide with the absolute, it becomes the regulative
standard of action. In such a case, if one comply with its
requirements he does what is materially, if he does not, what
is formally, wrong. The application is easy to the analogous
distinction in hand.

Another illustration is furnished by the principle of the
relativity of knowledge. Of existence not related to our cog-
nitive faculties we can know nothing. But the measure of our
knowledge is not the measure of existence. Because the mind
of man cannot compass the universe, we cannot say there is no

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 247

universe. There may be, there must be, a vast body of truth
in the realm of nature which lies beyond the scope of our
faculties; and there are mysterious principles and forces con-
nected with the phenomena which are in relation to our faculty
of observation — recondite laws, with which our interpretations
of the obtrusive facts of nature may or may not coincide.
There is an absolute and a relative sense of nature. Who is
there bold enough to say that his knowledge of nature exhausts
its meaning? Even so, there are heights and depths in the word
of God which we are unable to reach with our limited faculties.
Of that illimitable system of truth revealed to us in the
Scriptures, w^e certainly possess a part under the illumination
of the Holy Ghost; but it would be the climax of arrogance to
claim that we know the whole. Hence the possibility of growth
in our subjective apprehension of doctrines which in themselves
are unchangeable. Hence the duty of conforming our knowl-
edge more and more to the highest and absolute meaning of the
Bible. Hence, too, the differing interpretations of the Scrip-
tures by the people of God. The Baptists and their opponents,
for example, differ in regard to the mode and significance of
baptism. It is perfectly clear that both cannot have the abso-
lute sense of the Bible in relation to that ordinance.

It is evident that any discussion of the relations between the
Bible and science which fails to note these distinctions must
lead to confusion of thought. Between the Bible in its absolute
sense as the very word of God, and science in its absolute sense
as a true interpretation of the facts of nature, it is unnecessary
to say there can be no contradiction. They are both revelations
of God's truth. Between the Bible, as interpreted by the
church composed of uninspired and fallible men, and science
in its absolute sense, contradiction is possible; and it is also
possible between false science or even hypothetical science and
the Bible in its absolute sense. Here again we find a reason
why the Board should have paused before emitting the unqual-
ified judgment of approval which is now under consideration.

In the next place, neither is the mode indicated in which
conflicts between the Bible and science most commonly occur,
nor the way in which they may be adjusted. I have admitted
that no contradiction is possible between the Bible, as it is
what God its author intended it to mean, and science as the true
interpretation of the facts of nature. As no contradiction is

248 The Life Work of

possible, no contradiction can take place. There is no difference
of view between us here. But of what practical value with
reference to conflicts would be this old principle were it uni-
versally accepted? Admit here the principle of non-contradic-
tion, and what conflict wnll be settled? None; for, according
to the supposition, there is no conflict to be settled. What
conflict will be prevented? None; for, according to the suppo-
sition, no conflict is possible. We have a principle for prevent-
ing an impossible event ; a rule of action for avoiding impossible
actions ! We need a principle to help us, a rule of action to
guide us, when conflicts actually occur, as occur they inevitably
will.

If all men held the Bible in the sense which was intended by
its Author, accepted its real and absolute meaning, and all nieii
knew the real facts and processes of nature ; ah, then our prin-
ciple of non-contradiction would be mighty. We would be in
Paradise. But men will put, must put, their interpretations
upon the Bible and nature alike, and it is ordinarily between
these interpretations that contradiction, in an imperfect and
sinful world, occurs. You may cry, non-contradiction ! as much
as you please, and the shouts of conflict will be your answer.

I admit, also, that Dr. Woodrow's principle that our interpre-
tations of the Bible must square with the proved truths of
science is perfectly true. And here, I must say, he has been
incorrectly represented by some of his critics. But, in such
cases, the conflict is ended. The church must yield, has ever
yielded, an interpretation of the Bible contradictory to a settled
conclusion of science. We still want a principle, a rule of
action, which will help us when the actual conflict is upon us.
The mode in which contradiction and conflict emerge is the
opposition between the church's interpretation of the Bible and
scientific hypotheses. It is really not a conflict between the
Bible itself and science itself, but tetween the church's Bible
and the scientific man's science. The contradiction is between
theology and scientific hypotheses.

What ought the church to do in such cases? Shall she give
up her Bible — the Bible as she interprets it — for unverified
scientific hypotheses which contradict it? That is the great and
practical question, the decision of which is big with momentous
consequences. It is a defect in the exposition of the relations
between the Bible and science, that it does not undertake the

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 249

settlement of that question. Of this we are now witnesses.
This Synod has just such a conflict upon it. Could it adjust
the issue by consulting the principles of the address?

3. It may be added that the action of the Board involves
them in inconsistency with themselves.

They endorse Dr. Woodrow's exposition of the relations
between the Bible and science as plain, correct and satisfactory.
It follows, that they endorse his exposition of the relation
between the Bible and his science. But they declare that they
are not prepared to endorse his hypothesis of evolution as (o
Adam's body. Why? Manifestly because they could not see
how it is consistently related to the Bible. The exposition of
the relations between the Bible and science is plain, correct and
satisfactory !

Here is an inconsistency in the action of the Board which
should restrain the Synod from approving that action. For,
unless the Synod is prepared to say that it believes Dr. Wood-
row's hypothesis of evolution to be consistent with Scrii)(:ure,
it would, by concurring in the action of the Board, implicate
itself in the same inconsistency with them.

[Other strictures were passed upon the action of the Board,
but they are here omitted, as they had a passing value during
the progress of the discussion, and I have no motive to give
them further utterance.]

Let me now briefly recapitulate the reasons which have been
urged, why this Synod should not, by its solemn judgnjent,
approve the action of the Board of Directors formally i)ro-
nouncing the exposition of the relations between the Bible and
science plain, correct and satisfactory.

First, The assertion that the Bible does not teach scien<;e
needed further qualifications than were actually expressed.

Secondly. The affirmation that we are not to look for har-
mony, but merely non-contradiction, between the statements of
the Bible and those of science, is a departure from the funda-
mental laws of all thinking.

Thirdly, The exposition, while it provides for cases in which
the church's interpretation of the Bible and a proved truth of
science contradict each other, makes no provision for cases in
which the church's interpretation of the Bible and a disproved
assumption of science contradict each other. It gives the
advantage to science.

250 The Life Work of

Fourthly, The exposition has nothing to say about the con-
tradiction between the church's interpretation of the Bible and
an unproved scientific hypothesis. This is a signal omission.

Fifthly, The exposition furnishes no accurate definitions of
the vitally important terms science and tJie Bihle; fails to indi-
cate the mode in which conflicts generally occur between the
Bible and science ; and offers no rule of action to guide us when
conflicts actually arise.

Sixthly, The Board of Directors were, in the action in ques-
tion, inconsistent with themselves.

II. — The second question, which I propose to discuss, is in
regard to the action of the Board of Directors concerning the
teaching of Dr. Woodrow's hypothesis of evolution in our The-
ological Seminary.

The Board virtually, but formally and authoritatively, ap-
proved its teaching.* The minority of the Board protested, and
affirmed the position that it should not be permitted. I oppose
the Board's action and maintain the view of the minority. I
contend that this Synod ought to reverse the action of the
Board, and prohibit the teaching of Dr. Woodrow's hypothesis
in the Theological Seminary. By teaching it I mean, not the
exposition of it as an unproved hypothesis, but the inculcation
and defence of it as either a proved or a probable hypothesis.

The question, I conceive, is not. Is the Synod called upon
to say whether Dr. Woodrow's view contradicts the Bible in
its absolute sense? As the distinction has already been signal-
ized between the absolute meaning of the Bible as that which
God, its author, intended it to bear, and its relative meaning
as that which exists to the church interpreting it, that dis-
tinction need not now be explained. It would seem to be clear
that contradiction to the Bible in one of these senses is not
necessarily the same as contradiction to it in the other.

I trust that the Synod will not undertake to decide, and pro-
nounce upon, the question whether Dr. Woodrow's view con-
tradicts the Bible in its absolute, infallible sense, for reasons
which I will briefly state.

In the first place, our knowledge is not sufficient to warrant
us in dogmatising upon that question. In order to its dogmatic

*The Board did not approve the view, but by permitting it to be
taught, they approved the teaching.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 251

decision, we would require to possess perfect certainty as to
the correctness of our interpretation of the Scriptures upon
this point, and perfect certainty as to our interpretation of
nature in regard to it. But as we are not gifted with infalli-
bility in either respect, our liability to err should check the
utterance of an authoritative judgment in the premises.

In the second place, it becomes us to heed the cautions fur-
nished by the history of the church. It cannot be denied that
she has sometimes grievously blundered in pronouncing determ-
inative judgments upon questions of science, with reference to
which her policy was to be silent. There is always the danger
of such mistakes, the consequences of which must needs be
deplorable. Should the church commit them, she is subjected
to the humiliation of recanting her error, and there follows a
disastrous reaction upon the trustworthiness of her whole
teaching. Confidence in her authority as a spiritual guide is,
at least to some extent, impaired.

In the third place, should we decide that Dr. Woodrow's view
contradicts the Bible in its absolute sense, we would not only
declare that it ought not to be taught in a Presbyterian school,
but that no Christian man has a right to hold it. Are we pre-
pared to do that?

The question which, in my judgment, is really before the
Synod is in regard to the relation between Dr. Woodrow's
hypothesis and the Bible as our church interprets it: between
this scientific view and our Bible — the Bible as it is to us.
This is our court of last resort, our ultimate standard of judg-
ment; and, from the nature of the case, must be. This being,
as I apprehend it, the state of the question, the first proposition
which I shall lay down for the Synod's consideration is :

A scientific hypothesis which has not been proved, so as to
have become an established theory of law, and which is con-
trary to our church's interpretation of the Bible, and to her
prevailing and recognized views, ought not to be inculcated and
maintained in our Theological Seminaries.

I argue this from the nature and design of a theological
school. It is contradistinguished to secular schools. It is estab-
lished and supported by the church. Its nature and end are,
therefore, ecclesiastical. It is designed to teach what the
church holds and believes. For it to teach the contrary is to
violate its very nature and end. The church has the right to

252 The Life Work of

require, is solemnly bound to require, that her doctrines be
taught, and that what is contrary to her doctrines be not
taught. Otherwise, the results must be flagrant inconsistency,
unfaithfulness to her convictions of truth, recreancy to sacred
trusts and deliberate suicide. And in the event of a view,
opposed to her own, being supported by great talents and
acquirements, and, as in the case of scientific hypotheses,
beyond effective resistance by the other chairs, she actually
makes arrangements for the overthrow of her own views. She
arranges for her own sacrifice,

A theological seminary is peculiarly, distinctively, entirely, a
church school; and so is different from institutions which,
although they may have some connection with the church, are
partly maintained by other influences than her own.

The great end of a theological seminary, I have urged, is to
teach the church's interpretation of the word of God. For this
it exists; this is the law of its being. All other things are inci-
dental and subordinate to this, its chief end. The teaching of
Hebrew and Greek is not for their own sake. The Seminary is
not a classic school. The end is the correct interpretation of
God's word in the original text. But this interpretation must
accord with the church's Standards, or the teacher, breaking
with the church, ought to be silent on the points of difference,
or else retire. The teaching of Rhetoric is not for its own sake.
It is a means, the end of which is the powerful preaching of
the Gospel. The Seminary is not a school of Rhetoric. The
teaching of science is not for its own sake. The end is the
defence of the Scriptures from infidel assaults. The church-
school is not a scientific school. The same principle holds in
regard to the teaching of Metaphysics and Moral Philosophy.
The fact is, that our church does not formally provide for the
teaching of those branches, as she does for that of others men-
tioned. But if she did, the same principle would apply. They
would not be taught for their own sake, but to facilitate the
mastery of theology and vindicate the Scriptures against the
attacks of an infidel philosophy. The Seminary is not a school
of philosophy — of Plato or Aristotle or.Zeno, of Locke or Kant
or Hamilton — it is a school of Christ. These teachings may all
be used to illustrate, to elucidate, to defend the church's inter-
pretation of the Bible; never to gainsay, to weaken, to dis-
prove it.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 253

Further, our own Seminary was not designed simply to teach
the Scriptures. Every theological seminary of every evan-
gelical denomination is designed to teach the Scriptures. There
must be something distinctive to mark off ours from others —
some specific difference. What is it? This: ours was designed
to teach the Scriptures as interpreted by the Presbyterian
Church ; and is now maintained for the purpose of teaching
them as interpreted by the Southern Presbyterian Church.
This is too plain to need argument. The teachings of our sacred
school must conform to this end, or they become self-contra-
dictory, injurious, fatal.

The conclusion is obvious. Such being the nature and design
of a theological seminary, that which contravenes them ought
not to be taught in its halls.

Even a proved truth of science ought not to be inculcated in
a theological seminary when it contradicts our Standards as
the church's interpretation of the Scriptures. The only true
course, in this case, is for the church authoritatively to ex-
punge the untrue interpretation and substitute for it that which
has been proved to be true. But, until that is done, the Stand-
ards unchanged are the law by which all official teaching must
be regulated. That law cannot be legitimately resisted and
violated. The teacher is not the .iudge; the church alone is
judge, in the premises.

We hear much, in connection with the proceedings before us,
of strict compliance with the law, the constitutional law, the
written law. Down with all interpretations, opinions, views,
but that law ! Well, with what grace could an official teacher,
who inculcates views contrary to that law, appeal to the same
law for his vindication? In the Seminary the law is of no
force, but in the Board or in the Synods it is supreme !

If there be a principle of great practical consequence which
we are now called upon to establish, it is that until our Stand-
ards, as our interpretation of the Scriptures, be, as to points
objected to, changed in a constitutional way, no professor in a
Theological Seminary has the right to oppose what they teach
and to shake the confidence of his pupils and of the church in
them. Not even when he is conscientiously convinced that cer-
tain elements contained in them are untrue, has he the right,
as professor, to teach the contrary. His duty as to those chal-

254 The Life Work of

lenged elements is to be silent or else to withdraw. But of this
further on.

An unproved scientific hypothesis ought not to be inculcated
in a Theological Seminary, when that hypothesis is contrary to
the church's interpretation of the Bible, not only because of
the reasons already presented, but because such an hypothesis
may never be verified. In that event the church would be con-
victed of having taught scientific error. She would be obliged
to retreat from her position and confess her sin.

This makes it perfectly evident, that the church is bound to
adhere to her interpretations of the Scriptures until they are
proved to be incorrect. Only then ought she to abandon or
modify them. But it is clear that she has not reached that
point when she is only confronted with unproved hypotheses.
What a wretched course it would be for the cliurch to sur-
render her views at the demand of unverified hypotheses ! Who
would confide in her stability? Who would not pronounce her
fickle? Fallible she is, but she is in some degree guided by the
Holy Spirit in her interpretations of His word. She has the
promise of that guidance; and she would be untrue to her
dependence on this illumination, were she to give up her views
at the challenge of hypotheses not yet established upon com-
petent evidence.

These considerations are immensely enhanced by the fact
which should not in this discussion be lost sight of but noticed
and marked, that there have been instances in the church's
history in which she maintained her hold upon her old inter-
pretations of Scripture in the face of opposing scientific
hyi)otheses, and in which she was subsequently proved to have
been right by the weight of scientific evidence itself. In such
conflicts had she yielded to the pressure upon her and let go
her grasp upon her old views, what lamentable consequences
would have resulted I The hypothesis of the Specific Diversity
of the Human Races as opposed to the church's doctrine of the
Unity of the Race, within the memory of some here present,
was almost as freely discussed as is now the hypothesis of
Evolution. The church was agitated, but she adhered to her
received interpretation of the Bible upon that point, and subse-
quent developments have served to justify the conservative
position she then maintained. The same thing has been true,
in part, of the hypothesis of the extreme Antiquity of ]Man as

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 255

being at variance with the church's view of the biblical chron-
ology, and ever and anon coming to the front. So, also, the
hypothesis of Spontaneous Generation at one time bade fair to
receive the suffrages of the scientific world as an ascertained
truth; but Huxley himself has declared that Pasteur gave it
its finishing stroke. The church, too, has held her ground
against formidable objections, derived from the hypothesis of
the Original Diversity of Languages, to her doctrine of their
Original Unity.

The inference from these facts scarcely needs to be pressed
before a body like this, which has been distinguished by its con-
servatism, and its tenacious adherence to the traditional faith
of the Presbyterian Church. Suppose that in the instances
cited, in which the Church's old, recognized interpretations of
the Bible came, to a greater or less extent, into conflict with
unproved scientific hypotheses, she had with a fatal readiness
yielded, and squared her views with their demands, who could
estimate the damaging results which would have ensued?

The application is plain to the hypothesis now under consid-
eration. If it can be shown to be a mere hypothesis not yet
verified and established as a settled conclusion of science, like
the Copernican theory or the law of gravitation, can we resist
the obligation, enforced as well by the history of past conflicts
as by the requirements of conservatism and self-consistency, to
cling to our old view until it shall have been proved to be
untrue and therefore untenable? And if that course be the
dictate of policy and duty alike, are we not bound as a Synod
to prohibit the inculcation and defence of this hypothesis in the
sacred school, of whose purity of doctrine we are one of the
responsible guardians?

It cannot be left to scientific men to determine what is or is
not to be taught in our Theological Seminaries; nor can it be
left to any professor, whatever may be his department of
instruction, to determine that question. It is unnecessary to
describe the injurious effects of such liberty. They are patent
to the least reflection. Who are to determine this all-important
question? Proximately, the Board of Directors; but only prox-
imately : ultimately the Associated Synods. They have the
power to make the Constitution of the. Seminary, and therefore
the power to say what is or is not to be taught in its chairs.
They have the ultimate authority to control the matter of the

256 The Life Work of

views which are inculcated. It is not, I repeat it, the Pro-
fessors, or even the Board of Directors, but these Synods, who
are ultimately to determine what is or is not to be taught in
the Seminary. And for the discharge of this most important
and solemn function, the Synods are responsible before the
church at large and to their divine Lord and Judge.

Another thing vital to this discussion must not be over-
looked : I mean the manifest distinction between a Christian
man and an official teacher. The terms of admission into the
church must not be confounded with the terms of admission
into the teaching office. This is true of all official teachers of
every grade in the church — ruling elders and preaching elders ;
and is eminently true of the teachers of teachers, the Professors
in our Theological Seminaries, the Normal Institutes of the
church. We cannot dictate to a Professor what, as a man, he
is to believe and hold. "God alone is Lord of the conscience."
We are not sovereigns — no, sir, we are not even co-ordinates,
in the domain of private judgment. Into that inner sanctuary
none may enter but the soul and its God. But it is our right,
it is our duty, to dictate what, as a teacher in his official
capacity, a Professor can or can not teach in a Theological
Seminary. It is our right, and it is now our duty, to say
whether the Perkins Professor, as an official teacher and a ser-
vant of the church, can or can not inculcate his hypothesis of
evolution in our Theological Seminary.

It is urged that all the Professors in the Seminary do what
the Perkins Professor is alleged to do ; and that therefore a
judgment adverse to his teaching would be also opposed to
theirs. The principle to be here observed is, that if a view
taught by any Professor is contrary to the general judgment
of the church he must be sure, he must be able to show, that it
is positively supported by the Standards. This alone would
justify him in throwing himself against the general views of
the church. But if the church's views and the Standards coin-
cide, he must refrain from inculcating the objectionable tenet.

Now, is the ground taken that all the Professors in the Sem-
inary teach views which are opposed to the general judgment
of the church? And is it asserted that there has been a public
expression of opinion to that effect? If not, where is the like-
ness between the Perkins Professor's teachings and those of the
other Professors? It is clear that there is none. And have

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 257

the other Professors been led by public opinion to point out the
relation of the views they teach to the Bible? If not, then I
ask again, where is the likeness between the cases? There is
none. For it is perfectly certain that Dr. Woodrow's views
have been challenged, and that he has been led to indicate the
relations of science in general to the Bible and the relation to
it of his hypothesis of evolution in particular. Were the other
Professors similarly situated with himself, their cases as well
as his ought to have been before the Board of Directors, and
so may have been before the Synod for consideration.

But it will be said that this is not the whole of the argument,
nor its chief point. No ; but it is a part of the argument, and
that, I submit, has been answered. And now for the chief
point : it is that every other Professor than the Perkins Pro-
fessor teaches, as well as he, certain things between which and
the Bible there is no harmony. The object-matter of them is
such that the Bible has nothing to say about them; there is
simply the relation of non-contradiction. Ah, here is the mighty
principle of non-contradiction. It is applied to all the chairs.
If all the others teach certain things between which and the
Bible there is simply the relation of non-contradiction, why
may not the Perkins chair do the same thing? And if it is to
be condemned for doing that thing, why should not the others
share the condemnation, seeing they do the same?

Let us specify. The Professor of Biblical Literature teaches
Hebrew, Greek and Philology. Between these and the Bible
there is simply the relation of non-contradiction. Granted.
The Professor of Church History teaches the canons of His-
torical Criticism. Between them and the Bible there is simply
the relation of non-contradiction. Granted. A Professor teaches
Rhetoric. Betw^een that and the Bible there is the same rela-
tion. Granted. The Professor of Systematic Theology teaches
Metaphysics. Between it and the Bible there is simply the
relation of non-contradiction. Hold ! Not granted. There may
be the relation of contradiction. Should he inculcate even the
probable truth of Idealism, or Materialism, or Pantheism, or
Agnosticism, would not the church say that his teachings con-
tradict the Bible as she interprets it? And would she not
arrest such teachings?

The Perkins Professor teaches Natural Science. Between it
and the Bible there is simply the relation of non-contradiction.

258 The Life Work of

Hold, again ! Not granted ! It might be that there would obtain
simply the harmony of non-contradiction. But it might be,
also, that there would exist the dis-harmony of contradiction.
While Dr. Woodrow taught evolution expositorily, without
expressing any opinion in its favor, he taught, as I conceive,
nothing contradictory to the Bible. But now when he an-
nounces himself as holding it as probable, under limitations,
the church says : Your view contradicts my interpretation of
the Bible; and as my interpretation of the Bible is the Bible
to me, your view contradicts the Bible. The relation, then,
between his hypothesis and the Bible is, in the church's judg-
ment, not that simply of non-contradiction. The analogy, which
is alleged to exist between Dr. Woodrow's hypothesis of evolu-
tion and the matters specified as taught by the Professor of
Biblical Literature, Church History and Rhetoric utterly
breaks down.

But it may be contended that the Professor of Didactic and
Polemic Theology positively inculcates metaphysical hypotheses
which are extra-scriptural, and that therefore the analogy does
hold between his case and that of the Perkins Professor.
Speaking for the chair of Didactic and Polemic Theology, I
would say : It does inculcate hypotheses which are not to be
found stated in scientific form in the Scriptures. Between
them and the statements of the Bible there is not the harmony
of identity. But it is believed by the instructor that between
them and the Bible there is the harmony of non-contradiction.
Further than this, it is believed that between them and the
church's interpretation of the Bible there is harmony — the
harmony of non-contradictory statements. To speak in plain
language, it is believed that they are perfectly consistent and
harmonious with the Bible as the church understands and
teaches it. And further still, I would say that they are incul-
cated with the end in view, at least partly and chiefly, of evinc-
ing the harmony between them and our church's interpretation
of the Bible. The connection between Metaphysical Science
and Revelation is so taught as to make the former a defender
of the latter, its vindicator against the assaults of a sceptical
philosophy. In a word, metaphysical teachings are so used as
not to make it necessary to adjust the church's interpretation
of the Bible to them, but by them to elucidate and strengthen
that interpretation.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 259

Now, Natural Science may be employed in the same way, and
the analogy would then hold between the two chairs. But if
an hypothesis of Natural Science be maintained in contradic-
tion to the church's interpretation of the Bible, even on prob-
able grounds, the analogy, in point of fact, ceases. The true
question is, whether the actual attitude of the two chairs is
alike; whether the real, existing posture of the Perkins chair
towards the Bible as interpreted by our church is the real,
existing posture of the metaphysical chair towards the same
standard. That being the true state of the question, no unpre-
judiced mind can hesitate as to the decision. In the respects
mentioned, they are not alike — the analogy practically fails.

While I am speaking upon this subject, let me add, that, as
teaching in Metaphysics and Moral Philosophy is not necessi-
tated by the Constitution of the Seminary, the Synods may at
any time through the Board of Directors order its exclusion.
But if it be deemed expedient to retain it, should it appear that
the teachings of the present incumbent of the chair are opposed
to the general views of the church he would hold himself obli-
gated to suppress them, or else retire.

The chief point of the argument in question, namely, all the
Professors do what the Perkins Professor is alleged to do, has
now been considered, and it has been shown that it is no point
at all.

Another special argument which is urged is, that there are
differences upon important points between the Professors in our
Seminaries, and between parties in the church, as serious as
the difference between the Perkins Professor and others, and
yet these differences are tolerated. The very teaching of them
is permitted. Why, then, should the teachings of the Perkins
Professor be subjected to peculiar censure? Particular instances
have been furnished of these differences : Upon Predestination
and the Will ; upon the Imputation of Adam's guilt ; upon the
Call to the Ministry, etc. It is argued that all are agreed upon
the question of substantial fact, but upon the question of mode
discrepancies occur. So, in this particular case before us, all
are agreed in regard to the fact of creation, but the difference
arises with reference to the mode, and that is permissible. This
argument has not even the air of plausibility. One or two plain
considerations will effectually destroy the analogy upon which
it is based, and so subvert it along with its foundation.

260 The Life Work of

First, the parties who differ upon the questions instanced —
Predestination, the Will, Imputation, the Call to the Ministry,
etc. — profess to derive the proofs of their respective positions
from the Scriptures. Both sides aj^peal to them for support.
Those who maintain this hypothesis of evolution profess to
derive the reasons in its favor from science; and further, the
opponents of this particular hypothesis profess to get their
argument from the Bible as well as from science. The differ-
ence between the cases is a mighty one. There is no analogy
between them.

Secondly, both parties to the questions alleged appeal to our
Standards for proof of their views. For proof of this scientific
h3T3othesis no appeal to the Standards is possible. Here is
another mighty difference.

Thirdly, none of the parties to the questions specified would
maintain views which are jilainly contrary to the Standards.
If this scientific hypothesis can be proved to be plainly contrary
to the Standards, it would not stand upon the same foot with
the subjects upon which difference of teaching is allowable. It
would be in another and peculiar category.

As the teaching of the Professor of Systematic Theology in
our Seminary, upon the subject of the Will, is involved in this
allegation, the Synod will, I trust, indulge me in a few special
remarks about that matter. The principles of difference, which
have been signalized between the cases affirmed to be common,
will receive a special illustration in this instance. The view
taught by that Professor is neither extra-scriptural nor extra-
confessional. It professes to be both scriptural and confessional.
It claims to derive its proofs from the Bible, from the doctrine
of Calvin, from the symbols of the Reformed Church, and
especially from the Standards of our own Church. Whether or
not these claims have been made good, they have been made.
Such is the method of proof, as any one may satisfy himself
who will consult the Professor's published exposition of his
views in the Southern Presbyterian Review. Now to say that
the teaching of that view is on the same foot with the teaching
of the Perkins Professor's view of evolution, as he now holds it,
is simply to throw facts out of account.

So much for the argument that as differences of views upon
important subjects are tolerated in our church, and different
teachings in regard to them are permitted even in our Theo-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 261

logical Seminaries, the same liberty should be accorded to the
inculcation of the hypothesis of evolution which is in question.

Are, then. Theological Professors debarred from inculcating,
within the Seminaries, views which although opposed to the
Standards they sincerely and conscientiously believe to be true?
Without hesitation I answer, and I hope and believe this Synod
will answer: They are debarred, as Professors, from incul-
cating such views: In the first place, because they are
appointed to teach the Standards, not to gainsay and oppose
them; in the second place, because they are bound by their
solemn subscription to the Standards not to teach what is con-
trary to them ; in the third place, because this principle is the
only safeguard of the church against the teaching in our The-
ological Seminaries of contra-confessional doctrines and views.
The Standards are our impregnable rampart against error. Let
that go down, and truth as we hold it will go down with it. In
the fourth place, to be allowed to teach one view opposed to the
Standards is to be allowed to teach other views opposed to
them. No limit can be assigned to this fatal liberty. The
reduction to absurdity is obvious.

Are, then. Theological Professors bound to inculcate in the
Seminaries views which they conscientiously believe to be
erroneous, because they are taught in our Standards? I
answer, no. Two courses are open to them : either to be silent
in regard to those views, or to withdraw from the institutions.
And if the views excepted against are of fundamental or even
of high importance, the only alternative is to withdraw ; for
silent in regard to such views they have no right to be. Let us
take a specimen case: the law in our Standards touching the
marriage of a man with his deceased wife's sister. I speak not
now of the question whether it be scriptural or unscriptural,
whether it ought to be retained in the Standards or expunged.
But I take the ground that as long as it was or is a part of
our Standards and therefore of our Constitutional Law, no Pro-
fessor in our Theological Seminaries had or has the right, as
Professor and within the institutions, to oppose it or to teach
the contrary. This has been done. The fact shows that the
liberty which belongs to the individual man is tranferred to
the official teacher and the distinction between them over-
slaughed. But, what is this but insubordination to law in high

262 The Life Work of

places, and the encouragement of the temper of insubordination
to law in those who are to be its expounders and defenders?

I maintain that a Theological Seminary is not the place, and
instruction in its halls not the means, to create sentiments
adverse to any objectionable features of our Doctrinal Stand-
ards, or to attempt the inauguration of measures looking to
their elimination from them. There are other relations sus-
tained by Theological Professors, and other means accessible to
them, through which they may legitimately exert their influence
for the attainment of that end. Chiefly, there are the church
courts, which alone have the power to alter the Standards, and
the Professors are members of those courts. There they may
put forth their energies to secure emendations of the Constitu-
tional Law. Theological Professors, as such, are absolutely
debarred from opposing by their teachings the Standards of the
Church. This discussion is exceedingly important, contemplated
in the light of such a question as this. If, as it would appear,
we have not already settled our rule of action in regard to this
weighty business, it would be well for us to avail ourselves of
this great opportunity to accomplish so desirable, so necessary
an end.

I have thus endeavored to sustain the leading proposition of
this argument — namely, that a scientific hypothesis which has
not been proved, so as to have become an established theory or
law, and which is contrary to our church's interpretation of the
Bible and to her prevailing and recognized views, ought not to
be inculcated and maintained in our Theological Seminaries.
And I cannot leave the point without holding up to especial
notice some of the principles which have been brought out, and
which, if not determined before, deserve now, in connection
with this case, to be definitely settled by us as rules of action
for the future :

1. The church is bound to cleave to her interpretation in her
Standards of God's word, and to her traditional views, until
they have been proved to be untrue and therefore untenable.

2. No unverified hypothesis can afford such proof.

3. No Professor in a Theological Seminary, as Professor, is at
liberty in the classroom or in the chapel to inculcate views con-
trary to the Standards of the church, or to oppose any element
of those Standards. If he conscientiously hold views which are

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 263

inconsistent with them, lie ought to refrain from Inculcating
those views, or else retire from the institution.

4. I add, that should he persist in claiming and exercising
such liberty, it is the duty of the church through her con-
stituted organs of control to arrest him.

The second proposition which I submit is, That the Perkins
Professor's view of evolution is a scientific hypothesis, which
has not been proved so as to have become an established theory
or law, and which is contrary to our church's interpretation of
the Bible, and to her prevailing and recognized views.

Is this view of evolution a scientific hypothesis which has not
been proved so as to have become an established theory or law?
There are several modes in which it may be shown that a
scientific hypothesis is not proved : by the fact that it lacks the
common consent of scientific men as proved ; by the fact that
it is opposed by formidable difficulties which have not been
removed ; by the fact that it is absolutely contradicted by the
statements of supernatural revelation. It is not my purpose to
resort to any of these methods of proof in respect to the
hypothesis before us : others may do so if they please. I think
it sufficient to appeal to an authority which ought to be con-
clusive— the authority of Dr. Woodrow himself. What he
claims for his view is that it is "probably true." That is an
admission that, in his own judgment, it is not a proved truth
of science. For that which is only probable is not proved. If
in this I have misstated Dr. Woodrow's position, I am open to
correction.

If this be admitted, I pass on to the next allegation, to wit,
that this hypothesis is contrary to our church's interpretation
of the Bible, and to her prevailing and recognized views.

First, It is contrary to the Standards as the formal and
authoritative interpretation of the Scriptures by our church.
The relevant statement of the Confession of Faith is: "It
pleased God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, for the manifes-
tation of the glory of His eternal power, wisdom and goodness,
in the beginning, to create or make of nothing the world and all
things therein, whether visible or invisible, in the space of six
days, and all very good." The statement of the Larger Cate-
chism is : "The work of creation is that wherein God did in the
beginning, by the word of His power, make of nothing the world
and all things therein for Himself, within the space of six days,

264 The Life Work of

and all very good." The statement of the Shorter Catechism
is : "The work of creation is God's making all things of nothing,
by the word of His power, in the space of six days, and all
very good."

The hypothesis of evolution is inconsistent with the face-
meaning of these statements. The connection between the
words "of nothing" and the words "in the space of six days,"
"within the space of six days," justifies this view. If the Stand-
ards had meant to teach creation out of nothing in the first
instance only, they would have so connected the words "of
nothing" with the words "in the beginning" as definitely to
have conveyed that meaning. But they also connect the words
"of nothing" with the words "in the space of six days," so that
the impression is irresistibly made that they intended to teach
that creation out of nothing went along with the six days.*
It does not much matter here whether or not the Standards
mean by six days six literal days of twenty-four hours each.
If they could be diverted from their face-meaning and con-
strued to mean six periods, still the doctrine that creation out
of nothing proceeded concurrently with those periods, at least
in connection with the beginning of each, is contrary to Dr.
Woodrow's view that creation out of nothing occurred in abso-
lutely the first instance only, and that the evolution of the
earth, of the lower animals, and probably of Adam's body, was
by the process of mediate creation. But it is not necessary to
insist upon this point. I believe that Dr. Woodrow himself
candidly admits the inconsistency of his views with the obvious,
intended meaning of the statements of the Standards in regard
to creation.

It will in reply to this be said, that when Dr. Woodrow was
inaugurated as Professor he expressly stated, in his inaugural
address before the Board of Directors, his conviction of the
truth of the geological hypothesis touching the antiquity of the
earth with its strata and fossil remains ; that inasmuch as that
statement was unchallenged he virtually, if not formally, had
authority from the Board and the Synods controlling the Sem-
inary to inculcate that view ; and that as he now believes that

*It is noteworthy that the Shorter Catechism omits the words "in
the beginning."

JoHX L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 265

a certain kind of evolution is proved by geology, he is entitled
to teach his evolutionist view by the same authority.

But, first, He ought to have made his statement, virtually
excepting against the doctrine of the Standards, before he
formally subscribed them, and before he delivered his Inaugural
Address, which came after the solemnity of his subscription.
It was almost too late to file the exception in the Address. It
would have been exceedingly awkward to arrest the process of
induction at that point.

Secondly, Dr. Woodrow, however, cannot be charged with a
breach of trust in teaching his geological views, for the incul-
cation of which he had received a special dispensation. And as
to his subscription to the Standards we would have to allow
the force of his exception, on the supposition that he had pre-
viously acquainted the Board with it and they had raised no
objection.

But, thirdly, The question before this Synod is one which is
not determined by the Board of Directors and the controlling
Synods in the exception filed by Dr. Woodrow before them.
The question now is. What will this Synod and the Associated
Synods do as to the future? And here I must call attention to
the principle already maintained as indispensable, to wit, that
no Professor in a Theological Seminary ought to be permitted
to inculcate any view which is contrary to the Standards. The
Board of Directors, and by implication the Synods which
installed Dr. Woodrow, committed a mistake. They were falli-
ble, and it does not become us to censure them. A similar
question has been before our Presbyeries in many instances.
One I remember in connection with my own, in which exception
was taken to the law prohibiting marriage with a deceased
wife's sister. Reflection has convinced me that the solution of
the difficulty presented by such case is this : That we must
allow these conscientious exceptions, in points not involving
heresy, so far as the holding of them is concerned, but that we
cannot allow them so far as the official, authoritative teaching
of them is concerned.

The developments in this case exhibit the danger resulting
from a failure to abide by this rule of action. One thing leads
on to another. If one exception to the Standards be allowed in
an official teacher, another and another may be. Where shall
the line be drawn — the limit fixed? Manifestly, there ought to

266 The Life Work of

be a limitation; and it is what has been mentioned: no official
teacher ought, as such, to have liberty to inculcate views con-
trary to the Standards. If those formularies are wrong in the
features objected to, let them be altered by the constitutional
action of the church. It is, then, the duty of the Synods to
avoid the mistake made in the past, and without reflecting on
Dr. Woodrow for the teaching of views for which he had the
sanction of authority, to take order against the inculcation of
anti-confessional views in the future.

Fourthly, It has in these remarks been conceded that allow-
ance must be made for Dr. Woodrow's past teaching upon cer-
tain points notwithstanding the fact that it was not consistent
with the Standards,* for the reason that he explicitly enounced
his opinions as to those points at the time of his inauguration
as Professor. But in his late address and his expositions of it,
he also teaches as very probable the evolution of the earth
and of the lower animals, and as probable the evolution of
Adam's body. At the same time, I understand him as admitting
that the Standards teach that the earth and all its contents
were created out of nothing in the space of six days. And if he
should also admit that the days of the Standards are literal
days, the case is strengthened. He must, upon either supposi-
tion, admit the teaching of the Standards to be, that the earth
and its contents were not evolved. For the evolution of the
earth and the creatures upon it out of nothing in six days,
especially in six literal days, is out of the question.-]- Here,

♦Here I meant the face-meaning of the Standards, as intended by
their framers. I cannot concur in Dr. Mitchell's attempt, in his Lec-
tures on the Westminster Assembly, to show that the words "six days"
were purposely made indefinite so as to be susceptible of the meaning,
six long periods. Nor have I any idea that the Board of Directors
which installed Dr. Woodrow, put that construction upon the intention
of the Westminster Assembly. Whether the words may by us be made
to bear another than the obvious, literal interpretation is another ques
tion. If they may, the church ought in some authoritative way to say
so, in order that relief may be afforded to a conscientious teacher.

tHere Dr. Woodrow made an objection, the precise point of which I
regret my inability to recall. What I intended was, that an hypothesis
of evolution professedly theistic requires an indefinite period, with
creation out of nothing as its initial point ; and that is inconsistent
with any construction of the statements of the Standards.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 267

then, is a new view not covered by the exception entered at his
inauguration — a new view confessedly contrary to the
Standards.

Should the ground be taken that, granted the liberty to main-
tain in his teaching the great antiquity of the globe for geo-
logical reasons, the Professor's liberty also to maintain his view
of evolution is a good and necessary consequence, I reply, that
the liberty to inculcate his view of evolution is not a good and
necessary consequence. For, it has been held by distinguished
scientific men, like Louis Agassiz, that the fossil remains in the
strata of the earth represent extinct species, which were not
evolved from other species, but were supernaturally originated
by the power of the Creator.

It may further be said, that it is a recognized principle that
when an adequate authority commands the performance of a
certain office, it gives all the rights necessary to the accomplish-
ment of the contemplated end. This principle is, under limita-
tions, true. But the question is in regard to its application in
the present instance. In the first place, the authority com-
manding the teaching of science in connection with revelation
confers the right to teach science in a certain sense — to expound
it with a view to show its relations to the Bible. But that it
grants the right to inculcate science as opposed to the very
charter in which the authority itself is grounded, and the
statute-law by which itself is governed, — this is infinitely
absurd. In the second place, if the authority gave the right to
inculcate a geological theory, notwithstanding its inconsistency
with the obvious meaning of the Standards, it was a special
dispensation limited to that particular teaching. The teacher
could not, without further authorization, inculcate any other
view opposed to the Constitution.

Secondly, I proceed to show that the hypothesis in question
is contrary to the church's prevailing and recognized views.
When I speak of the church's views, I allude not to mere pop-
ular opinions or sentiments, but to the statements of represen-
tative theologians and the orthodox belief of God's people in
the Presbyterian Church. These views of the church with
reference to the subject before us — the origin of Adam's body —
are in their nature interpretations of the statements of the
Bible and of our Standards in regard to it ; and it deserves to
be remarked that the two classes of statements are so nearly

268 The Life Work of

coincident with each other that the interpretation of one is
substantially the interpretation of the other. The Standards
do not so much interpret the Scriptures in relation to this sub-
jest as reproduce their statements. But were the question,
whether interpretations of the Standards as themselves an
interpretation of the Scriptures would not involve the absurdity
of an interpretation of an interpretation, the answer would be
that there is no absurdity in that supposition. The principle
of interpretation of the Constitutional Law is not only legit-
imated by that law itself, but it could easily be shown that it
is absolutely necessary. Whenever two parties, both appealing
to the law, oppose each other, there is a conflict of interpreta-
tion. The judicatory which decides between them, whether
acting judicially or deliberatively, either elects one of these
conflicting interpretations and sustains it, or frames one of its
own differing from both. In either case there is the interpre-
tation of the Standards as themselves an interpretation of the
Scriptures ; and from the nature of the case the interpreting
decision is the joint judgment of the constituent members of
the body. The interpretation of each member is a factor in the
aggregate of interpretations which is termed the decision. So
far for the authoritative action of judicatories.

The same principle, with different applications, however,
holds in regard to the views of the church as interpretations
of the Standards with reference to questions, like the one
before us, of public interest. There is an aggregate of inter-
pretations which constitute the general judgment of God's
people in the church — their prevailing and recognized views ;
and it is proper to consider those interpretative views as enter-
ing into the standard of judgment into comparison with which
the teachings of a Theological Seminary are brought.* Now,

*In thus speaking of the views of the church, I had no intention to
affirm that they constitute standards of judgment in cases in which
alleged heresy is tried by church-courts. The opening sentences of this
speech show that no such application of them is pleaded for in the pres-
ent instance. But that the general views of the church do, and ought
to, exercise a powerful inffuence upon the question, what sort of teach-
ings should exist in a Theological Seminary, supported and controlled
by the church, is too plain to require argument. To take any other
view is to break with common sense. The very lowest consideration in
regard to the matter is conclusive ; the church cannot be expected to
pay for teaching to which she is conscientiously opposed.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 269

the church holds certain views in regard to the statements of
the Standards — and they are substantially the statements of
the Bible — concerning the formation of man's body in the first
instance ; and the position now taken is that the hypothesis of
evolution under consideration is contrary to those views. Let
us compare them.

1. The hypothesis is, that the dust from which Adam's body
was formed was organic dust. The church's view is, that it
was inorganic dust — the words "of the ground" designating the
sort of dust; that the sentence, "unto dust shalt thou return,"
and the inspired words in Ecclesiastes, "Then shall the dust
return to the earth as it was," indicate not animal forms, but
what is commonly known as dust and so universally called.

2. The hypothesis is, that Adam's body was evolved out of,
descended with modification from, a long line of animal
ancestry reaching back for a protracted period. The church's
view is, that Adam's body was formed of dust by a sudden,
supernatural, constructive act of God.

3. The hypothesis is, that Adam as to his body was born of
animal parents. The church's view is, that Adam as to his
body was not born at all — that he had no animal parents.

4. The hypothesis is, that Adam as to his body was at first
in an infantile condition, and grew to the stature of a man.
The church's view is, that Adam as to his body never was an
infant, that he did not grow, but was suddenly and super-
naturally formed in the full possession of mature bodily powers.

5. The hypothesis is, that the existence of Adam's body pre-
ceded for years the formation of Eve's body. The church's
view is, that Adam's body did not precede for years the forma-
tion of Eve's ; but that the formation of Eve's body followed
closely upon the formation of Adam's.

Thus, in five particulars, it has been shown that the
hypothesis before us is contrary to the church's views.

But are the church's views what they have now been assumed
to be? and are they her prevailing and recognized views? Of
that I will proceed to furnish proof.

It will not be denied that up to the time of the emergence of
this controversy, occasioned by the delivery and publication of
Dr. Woodrow's address, the church's general views were what
I have represented them to be. How has it been since? What
are the views of the church which have been developed, brought

270 The Life Work of

out into light and maintained during tlie discussion wliicti has
occurred?

I cite, first. The Faculty of Columbia Seminary. Every mem-
ber of it has declared his inability to concur in Dr. Woodrow's
interpretation of Scripture so far as his hypothesis of the evo-
lution of Adam's body is concerned. The question as to the
relations of the Bible and science is not just here alluded to,
and therefore I do not undertake to say how far there may be
concurrence in his views on that subject. The question is as to
the relation of the church's views to this particular scientific
hypothesis. Let us keep the state of the question clearly and
definitely before us. I repeat it, that upon that question every
member of the Faculty holds a view opposed to that of their
colleague.

I mention, next, the Board of Directors of Columbia Sem-
inary. Every member of it has declared his inability to concur
in Dr. Woodrow's view : the minority, of course, and the
majority also in the paper which they adopted and which was
reported to the Synod.

I would refer, too, to the religious journals of our church.
Of these there are eight. One of them is Dr. Woodrow's own
paper and must therefore be thrown out of account. Of the
other seven only one has advocated Dr. Woodrow's view. Here,
then, are six of the old, established journals of the church,
which fail to concur in the hypothesis in question. Is it not to
be inferred that they represent the opinion of the great majority
of the church ?

It may be said that all this is a begging of the question — that
the Synods have not yet acted upon the case, and it may prove
to be fact that they will by vote sustain the Board and conse-
quently Dr. Woodrow's teaching: it is but an assumption that
the church is opposed to his view; that remains to be seen. I
have not begged the question, and have made no unwarrantable
assumption. Were the question upon which this Synod is called
upon to decide, whether it can concur in Dr. Woodrow's view
and it should vote that it does concur, I would have made an
unjustifiable assumption as to the sentiments of this body. But
if the question be, as indeed it is, whether the Synod will allow
the teaching of Dr. Woodrow's view in the Seminary, and it
should decide to allow it, that decision would not exhibit the
opinions of the members as to the view itself. Witness the

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D, 271

action of the Board of Directors. And I undertake to say, that
if the question before us now were, whether this Synod can
concur in Dr. Woodrow's hypothesis, there are but few who
would express such concurrence.

No; it cannot be successfully denied that the overwhelming
mass of the views of our church — as also of all evangelical
churches — is opposed to the hypothesis of the Perkins Pro-
fessor.

If, now these propositions have been sustained by competent
proofs : first, that a scientific hypothesis which has not been
proved, so as to have become an established theory or law, and
which is contrary to our church's interpretation of the Bible,
and to her prevailing and recognized views, ought not to be
inculcated and maintained in our Theological Seminaries;
secondly, that the Perkins Professor's view of evolution is a
scientific hypothesis which has not been proved so as to have
become an established theory or law, and which is contrary to
our church's interpretation of the Bible and to her prevailing
and recognized views, — the conclusion is irresistible, that the
Perkins Professor's view of evolution ought not to be incul-
cated and maintained in our Theological Seminaries. The
practical result ought to be, that the Synod should prohibit its
inculcation and maintenance, even as probably true, in our own
Theological Seminary.

During this discussion the majority report has by some
speakers been sustained in aflirming that, as this hypothesis of
evolution is extra-scriptural, the church can make no deliver-
ance concerning its truth or falsity. To this I reply, first, that
the Board of Directors did make a deliverance concerning it,
when, having Dr. Woodrow's Address before them in which the
probable truth of the hypothesis is asserted, they declared it
to be consistent with perfect soundness in the faith, and thus
gave their ofl3cial consent to its being inculcated in the Sem-
inary. Were not the Board representatives of the church in
making that deliverance? This Synod is now asked to do the
same thing. If it does it, will it not by its deliverance approve
the teaching in the Seminary of the probable truth of this
hypothesis? And will not the church utter itself through the
Synod's deliverance? Secondly, It has been maintained that
the church cannot teach science, because it is extra-scriptural.
But it has also been maintained that the duties of the Perkins

272 The Life Work of

chair necessitate the teaching of science in connection with
revelation. Some teaching of science by the chair is unavoid-
able. I?ut the chair is an exponent of the church's teachings.
It comes to this then ; that in one breath it is denied that the
church can teach science, and in another it is affirmed that she
does teach it. Thirdly, I take issue with the assertion that this
hypothesis of evolution is extra-scriptural. What is the
hypothesis? It is that the evolution of Adam's body from
animal forms is probably true. But the well-nigh universal
interpretation by the church of the biblical statement is, that
Adam's body was supernaturally formed out of the literal dust
of the ground. Now there is here a conflict of probabilities.
To the extent of the probability of the hypothesis we are
obliged to admit the improbability of the ordinary interpreta-
tion of the Bible account of the origin of Adam's body. It is
clear that the hypothesis enters the domain of the Scriptures,
and to the extent of its probability claims to modify their inter-
pretation. It cannot, therefore, be simply extra-scriptural.*

It has been said that outside bodies and writers have under-
taken to settle this question before us, and have charged the
Perkins Professor with heresy and infidelity; and it is implied
that this influence from without is operating upon the Synod.
In reply I would remark, that the advocates of the minority
report propose to shield Dr. Woodrow from the accusation of
heretical teaching. That is the very purpose of the first resolu-

*Some notice of a dilemma urged by one of the speakers was intended,
but was excluded by the pressure of time. It was this : either the
hypothesis is extra-scriptural, or it is intra-scriptural. These are con-
tradictories. If, therefore, the opponents of the majority report deny
that it is extra-scriptural, they must admit that it is intra-scriptural.
The opponents of the majority report accept the situation. They deny
that it is extra-scriptural and affirm that it is intra-scriptural. But
it is one thing to affirm that it is intra-scriptural, and quite another to
affirm that it is scriptural. They affirm that it is both intra-scriptural
and contra-scriptural. It goes within Scripture in order to invade it.
Satan sometimes speaks within Scripture, but he is never scriptural. If
the dilemma had been : Either the hypothesis is unscriptural or it is
scriptural, the opponents of the majority report would have affirmed
that it is unscriptural and denied that it is scriptural. The horns of
the dilemma, which were considered by some very formidable, were as
harmless as those of an Irish bull. The opponents of the majority
report took one of them, but it had hay on it. No blood was spilt —
there was no gore.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 273

tion of that report. It is, therefore, illegitimate to imply that
the Synod is influenced by outside opinions, or that it will not
form an independent judgment of its own.

It has been asserted that it is really our church which is now
on trial in the face of the civilized world, and that the oppo-
nents of the teaching of the hypothesis would cause her to
re-enact the blunders of the middle ages. I answer, that on the
contrary, we ask the Synod not to decide upon the question,
whether this hypothesis contradicts the Bible in its highest and
absolute sense — the sense divinely intended, and therefore
infallible and immutable. We do not propose to take our
church back to the middle ages and make her a suppressor of
the free investigations of science. Let science pursue her
inquiries in her own field untrammeled ; but surely the church
has a right to say what may or may not be taught in her own
theological schools.

The ground has been taken that Christianity itself is an
instance of evolution. To this astonishing statement I reply:
there is a manifest distinction to be here observed — a distinc-
tion which I have heard Dr. Woodrow himself point out, and
in which I agreed with him, between the progressive develop-
ment of a plan by supernatural interventions of an intelligent
author and evolutimi by inherrent forces in the things evolved.

[Here Dr. Woodrow objected that he was misrepresented —
that he had expressly asserted the contrary. He misunderstood
me, as I afterwards learned. I supposed him to object to the
statement that he had approved such a distinction, and
answered that nevertheless it was a good one. But he excepted
against the statement as to the nature of evolution as having
come from him. I did not, however, say self-originated or self-
subsisting forces. I used the word inherent ; and if evolution
does not proceed by forces, however originated or sustained,
inherent in the things evolved, I know not what it is.]

Now Christianity, or more properly the plan of redemption,
has been developed through the past by supernatural additions.
It did not evolve under Divine superintendence by a force
inherent in itself, and springing from the first promise as a
primordial germ. There is, therefore, no analogy between the
doctrine of the development of the gospel and the hypothesis of
the evolution of nature.

274 The Life Work of

I have heard with surprise the allegation that theological
development has always taken place through the discussion of
unproved hypotheses, and that consequently it would be a great
mistake to prohibit the teaching of this hypothesis because it
is unproved. The church has always maintained her doctrines
upon scriptural grounds. They are divinely revealed and there-
fore cannot be hypotheses. In her progress towards a clearer
apprehension of them she has discussed, it is true, many
unproved hypotheses, but she has done it in order to refute
them.

It has been contemptuously charged that the minority report
is a piece of patchwork, illogical and unworthy to be submitted
to the Synod. On what ground? Because, as it is alleged, it
affirms that Dr. Woodrow's hypothesis neither involves heresy
nor contradiction to the Scriptures, and yet that its teaching
should be prohibited in the Seminary. I reply, that the report
does exonerate Dr. Woodrow from the charge of heresy, but it
is altogether incorrect to say that it does not represent his
teaching as contradictory to the Scriptures. It draws the dis-
tinction, already emphasized in these remaks, between the Bible
in its highest and absolute sense — the sense which was intended
by God, its author — and the Bible as interpreted by our church.
It maintains that the Synod ought not to decide upon the ques-
tion whether this view of evolution is contrary to the Bible in
the first of these senses, and that it ought to decide upon the
question whether it is contrary to the Bible in the second sense.
Further, it asks the Synod to decide that it is contrary to the
Bible in the latter of these senses. Until this distinction is
overthrown, the charge that the report is illogical and weak
is destitute of foundation. If the distinction is ridiculous and
unintelligible, upon what ground is it competent to the church
to amend her doctrinal Standards? On what ground is she now
engaged in amending them? If the Standards as her interpre-
tation of the Bible are in every respect identical with the Bible
in its infallible and unchangeable sense, how can she amend
the Standards? Can she amend the Bible in its highest and
absolute sense? I believe and hold that in many and important
particulars, especially the essential elements of the plan of
salvation, the Standards are identical with the absolute mean-
ing of the Bible, and that we are entitled to speak upon those
points confidently and authoritatively; but to say that such an

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 275

identity exists in every particular, even the most unessential,
is to say that the church's knowledge absolutely exhausts the
meaning of the Scriptures, and that her Standards are as
infallible and unchangeable as it. So far from being illogical
and unworthy of consideration, the positions of the minority
report are grounded in distinctions as impregnable as they are
clear.

It has, in the course of this discussion, been contended that
the pledge subscribed by the Professors in the Seminary only
binds them not to teach any doctrine contrary to their belief
that the Standards are "a just summary of the doctrines con-
tained in the Bible;" that it does not obligate them not to teach
what they may believe to be contrary to some particular state-
ment of the Standards. I am constrained to think this a mis-
taken construction of the pledge. Evidently by the term sum-
mary it is meant to affirm, that while the Standards do not give
a minute statement of all the details of Scripture they do
furnish a comprehensive statement of all its doctrines. Those
doctrines are given comprehensively, but still they are given.
Consequently to teach what is contrary to any statement of the
doctrinal Standards is to teach what is contrary to some state-
ment of doctrine in the Scriptures. To teach, for example,
what is contrary to the doctrine of the Standards concerning
creation is, our church being judge, to teach what is contrary
to the doctrine of the Bible concerning that subject. To adopt
any other view would be to take the ground of the New School
men in the controversy of 1837 and 1838 — that the subscription
to the Standards is a subscription to them only "for substance
of doctrine." That ground being allowed, the check provided
in the pledge to the teaching of error would have scarcely more
than a nominal value.

The view has been urged that the proceedings of the Synod
in this matter are unconstitutional — that is, inconsistent with
the Constitution of the Seminary and also with the rights con-
ferred by the Constitution of our church. By some it has been
contended, that "the Synods have no right to remove a Pro-
fessor;" that by the Constitution of the Seminary the Board
alone possess that power ; that the Synods can only act in such
a case through the Board; that the Constitution is a Bill of
Rights guaranteeing protection to the Board and the Professors
as well as to the Synods ; that Dr. Woodrow's rights as secured

276 The Life Work of

to him by that instrument are not respected in these extra-
legal proceedings; and that charges should have been tabled
against him and a formal trial had, when a case would have
been submitted to the review and control of the Synods. In
reply, I would say :

First. The party supporting Dr. Woodrow are inconsistent
with themselves in taking this ground. It would have been
different, if they had contented themselves with protesting
against the unconstitutionality of these proceedings, and con-
fined their argument to that question. This they have not
done; but have appeared in Synod as advocates and have
argued the whole question as to its merits — as to evolution and
the legitimacy of teaching it, as probably true, in the class-
exercises of the Seminary. It is therefore not now competent
to them to except against the unconstitutionality of the Sj'nod's
proceedings.

Secondly, The Bill of Rights, so elequently described by one
of the speakers, is not only intended to guard the rights of the
Board and of individual teachers, but also to guard the rights
of the Seminary, of the Synods, of the church and of the truth.
The Constitution does give to the Board the power to remove
Professors. But it also declares that all the acts of the Board
are subject to the control of the Synods, which alone possess
ultimate power. They can veto the election of a Professor by
the Board. They can veto the removal of a Professor by that
body ; and, by necessary implication, they can veto the refusal
of the Board to remove a Professor. Let us suppose that a
Professor should even teach heresy, and that the Board were
so enamored of his gifts and abilities as to refuse to remove
him, would the Synods allow justice to be baffled by mere
technicalities? No, sir; they would sweep away the Board and
the teacher alike.*

♦This is obvious, so far as ttie Board are concerned. Since ttiesa
remarks were uttered, ttie Synods have changed the personal composi-
tion of the Board, so as to secure one which will execute their will.
But if in any case, the Synods should fail to execute their will medi-
ately through a Board, from a lack of nerve on the part of the mem-
bers or for any other reason, they would have the power and the right
to execute their will immediately. And in taking that course they
would act constitutionally. Why? Because the Constitution requires
that no professor shall teach anything contrary to the Standards of

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 277

Thirdly, It is forgotten by those who offer these objections
to the constitutionality of the Synod's proceedings that a Pro-
fessor in a Theological Seminary sustains two relations — one
in which he is responsible as a teacher to the Curators of an
educational institute, and another in which he is responsible
as a minister of the gospel to his Presbytery. There is no
question, to my mind, that the Constitution gives the Board of
Directors the power in some way to try a Professor; but the
question is whether there are no cases in which the Board may
arrest certain objectionable teachings, or even take steps look-
ing to the removal of an objectionable teacher, without the
formality of a regular trial. f In regard to that question I
submit the following considerations :

1. It would violate all analogy to suppose that the Curators
of an educational institution could not, upon grounds of expe-
diency, prevent certain teachings, or even request the resigna-
tion of a teacher, without instituting formal process against
him. If they should be convinced by sufficient evidence that
his teaching of certain views, or his continuance in office, would
be detrimental to the interests of the institution and to other
related interests, what hinders them from taking that course?
And is it not almost unsupposable that one, requested to vacate
his position by competent authority, should refuse to comply
with the request, or demand a formal trial before he will admit
the necessity of his retirement?

2. There was in this instance no need for the tabling of
charges and for a formal trial. The evidence before the Board
and the Associated Synods was sufficient to ground action on
the part of either. The Board might have proceeded, upon
that evidence, to prohibit the inculcation of the Perkins Pro-
fessor's peculiar views if they had deemed them prejudicial
to the welfare of the Seminary and the interests of the church.

the Church. If, then, the Board will not enforce that requirement,
what remains but that the Synods shall themselves enforce it? Shall
the creator and ruler be estopped from carrying into execution its own
code of rules because its creature and subject will not? Yes; the
Synods not only have the power to remove the Board, but in certain
supposable cases a professor himself.

tThe Seminary Constitution says nothing about the tabling of
charges and formal process.

278 The Life Work of

They declined to do so. The same evidence comes before this
Synod as one of the bodies controlling the Seminary, and it is
competent for it to examine the evidence and decide whether
it be sufficient to justify it in prohibiting the teaching in the
institution of the vievrs in question. The evidence referred to
is the Perkins Professor's Address upon Evolution, which he
laid before the Board for their consideration. In that address
he exhibits the views he holds upon the subject of evolution —
the views which it might be expected that he would inculcate
in his classroom. This kind of evidence is universally admitted
to be valid. Had the Professor appeared in person and orally
expounded his views, could he have more clearly set them
forth than he had done in that carefully prepared address?
What need was there, what need is there now, to institute a
formal trial involving process in order to ascertain his views?
The published document is before the Synod, along with the
subsequent expositions of it by its author, and he himself is
present in this body, with amjile opportunity accorded to him
of stating, explaining and vindicating his views. Is not the
Synod then entitled, with all this evidence before it rendering
a formal trial upon charges unnecessary, to proceed with the
investigation and come to a decision of the question whether
the Professor's peculiar teachings should be continued or pre-
vented in the halls of the Theological Seminary? The Synod
would, in pursuing this course, be sustained by the precedents
of the Supreme Court of the Presbyterian Church.

In confirmation of this position I refer to the decisions ren-
dered upon the examination of published views in the instances
of the Rev. Samuel Barker, of the Rev. Hezekiah Balch, of
the Rev. William C. Davis, of the Rev. Thomas B. Craighead,
and of the Rev. Albert Barnes.*

Here a distinction must be observed : between the relation
of the Perkins Professor personally to the Seminary, and the
relation to it of the teaching of his views on the subject in ques-
tion ; between his continuing to teach, and his continuing to
teach his special hypothesis of evolution. The Synod is not
asked to remove him, but to disapprove the action of the Board
consenting to his inculcation of that hypothesis, and also to
prohibit the inculcation of the hypothesis, even as probably

*Baird's Digest, Bk. vii., Parts iv, vi, ix, x, xi.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 279

true. That the Synod's pronouncing judgment upon the Pro-
fessor's published views, and taking order in regard to their
being taught in the Seminary, would be, as has been charged,
"to persecute him and tyrannize over him," I am unable to see.

It is contended that with the question of the truth or falsity
of evolution this body has nothing to do. I answer that Dr.
Woodrow affirms it, under limitations, to be probably true;
and with the question whether, as Professor, he shall so teach,
the Seminary has to do, and the Board of Directors has to do
with it, and with it this Synod has to do.

It has been said : The minority report asserts that Dr. Wood-
row inculcates and defends the hypothesis of evolution. I
reply : It does not. It asks the Synod to adopt a resolution pro-
hibiting its inculcation and defence. How prohibiting that
sort of teaching can refer to the past, it is impossible to see.

It has been maintained that Dr. Woodrow has not taught
the probable truth of his evolution hypothesis. No one has
made the statement that he has. I never thought that he did
more than expound the hypothesis without expressing an opin-
ion in its favor. But he now states his belief of its probable
truth, and his intention to teach its probable truth. What we
move the Synod to do is to prohibit that teaching. It is vain
to say — ^as has been said — that although, in obedience to his
convictions, he will teach the probable truth of his hypothesis,
he will not urge its acceptance upon the students. It will not
be necessary for so able a teacher, after giving his reasons in
favor of its probable truth, to exhort his pupils to receive it.

The point, it is urged again and again, the only point to
which Dr. Woodrow directs his instructions, is the connection
between this hypothesis and the Bible. That is all. Yes; but
what sort of connection? Why, this : the hypothesis being prob-
ably true, the ordinary interpretation of the Bible is probably
untrue. It is modified by the hypothesis. It is to the teaching
in a Seminary of that kind of connection that objection is made
and the Synod is asked to oppose their prohibition.

In the course of his speech Dr. Woodrow said that if we hold
to an absolute sense of the Scriptures which may be different
from the interpreted sense, we must believe that the Standards
are not scriptural. No, sir ; we believe that the Standards
express the absolute sense, but in some respects our belief may
not coincide with that sense. We are not infallible. When

280 • The Life Work of

Dr. Woodrow has denied the scripturalness of the law in the
Standards concerning marriage with a deceased wife's sister,
did he believe that that part of the Standards expressed the
absolute meaning of the Scriptures? If he did, he opposed
what he believed to be the absolute sense of the Scriptures. If
he did not, he admitted his belief that the Standards do not
always express that sense.

The formidable array of testimonies which Dr. Woodrow
has exhibited, in order to prove that his hypothesis of evolu-
tion is not in so unverified a condition as has been asserted,
goes to show that he is satisfied with the evidence which sup-
ports it. He frankly confesses before the Synod that he is,
under the limitations he states, a pronounced evolutionist. Is
the Synod prepared to permit his inculcation of this view in
our theological school?

I have never believed heretofore that the foundations of the
Seminary were seriously endangered. Even in its darkest days
I trusted that the kind Providence which had favored it from
its beginning would continue to sustain it. But now I feel
that the institution is on the edge of deadly peril. Since
coming to this meeting I have heard the witticism that the
opponents of evolution are not so much wrong as too late I 1
must retort that the advocates of its maintenance in the Sem-
inary are too soon — too soon, sir, for the sentiment of the
church, by which the institution is upheld ! In a certain part
of this State there stood what seemed to be a sacred edifice. A
stranger passing by inquired what it was, and was told that it
was a Universalist church. Oh, said he, that is the no-hell
church. The epithet damaged it. Let the hypothesis of evolu-
tion be inculcated in the theological school at Columbia, and to
the question of the stranger. What institution is this? the
answer will be, This is the Evolution Seminary. I do not deny
that students may come to it, but the chief attraction will be
its scientific teaching, and the majority of the people of God
will withdraw from it their sympathy and their support.

This great speech consumed three hours in its deliv-
ery. At times the famous orator and debater rose to
those dizzy heights of eloquence to which he alone
could climb. He was moved by an awful earnestness.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 281

He felt a danger. He contended for a principle and a
policy. As to the relation between science and the
Bible he could not be satisfied with mere "non-contra-
diction." It must be the "harmony of non-contradic-
tion." He did not dogmatize: there was an "absolute
sense" of Scripture, and it was always possible that
fallible men might miss that meaning. But he would
hold all professors and teachers in theological schools
to the Church's interpretations of the Scriptures as
set forth in her standards of faith. Evolution had not
been approved by his Church, and no man must incul-
cate it. He uttered no invective. He said nothing
bitter. He respected his colleague. He would consent
to no charge of heresy against him. He did not
believe in evolution. He did not want his Synod to
approve it. He wanted its inculcation in the Seminary
forbidden.

When the Synod finally came to a vote, it rejected
both the majority and minority reports, each by a vote
of fifty-two to forty-four; and then adopted, by a
vote of fifty to forty-five, the following resolution,
offered by the Rev. W. T. Thompson, D. D. :

''Resolved, That in the judgment of this Synod the teaching
of evolution in the Theological Seminary at Columbia, except
in a purely expository manner, with no intention of incul-
cating its truth, is hereby disapproved."

The three other controlling Synods, Georgia, Ala-
bama, Florida, in even more emphatic terms, disap-
proved the teaching of evolution in the Seminary.

But the matter continued to vex the Church through-
out all its borders and the Synod of South Carolina
most intensely of all. The subject practically monop-
olized its meetings. The Seminary was grievously suf-

282 The Life Work of

fering in consequence of the controversy. The Synod
met in the fall of 1886 at Cheraw, South Carolina, and
sent a telegram to Dr. Woodrow requesting him to
express a willingness to withdraw from the Seminary.
He telegraphed his refusal. Then Dr. Girardeau
offered the following resolution, which was adopted
by a vote of seventy-eight to forty-two:

"Whereas this Synod adopted the following resolution:

" 'Resolved, That this Synod, being deeply sensible of its
responsibility for its administration of the high and solemn
trust reposed in its hands in connection with the Theological
Seminary, and deeming it important to the future welfare and
efficiency of that institution that Dr. Woodrow should with-
draw from relation to it. hereby requests him to signify to the
Synod at once his willingness to tender to the Board of Direc-
tors, at an early date, his resignation of the Perkins chair, and
that this action be telegraphed, by special committee, at once,
to Dr. Woodrow, requesting immediate answer.'

"And whereas Dr. Woodrow has declined to comply with
this request of the Synod, therefore,

''Resolved, That the Synod of South Carolina, the other
Synods concurring, does hereby instruct the Board of Directors
to meet at as early a day as practicable after the meeting of
the Synods of South Carolina, Georgia and Florida, and renew
the request to Dr. Woodrow for his resignation ; and, if he
shall decline to accede to that request, the Board is hereby
ordered to declare the Perkins professorship vacant, and make
such provision for the department as may seem best."

In one phase or another, this painful controversy
continued until Dr. Woodrow was removed from his
professorship in the Seminary, and his views were
judicially condemned by the General Assembly of the
Church.

In 1890, on a letter of dismission from the Presby-
tery of Augusta, Dr. Woodrow applied to be received

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 283

into the Presbytery of Charleston, of which Dr. Girar-
deau was a conspicuous member. After an examina-
tion, this Presbytery declined to receive him into its
membership, in the hope that such action would end
the agitation. In these Presbyterial proceedings. Dr.
Girardeau took no part, other than to cast his vote.
The Synod of South Carolina, that fall at Yorkville,
sustained this action of the Presbytery, and the tur-
moil came to an end.

The primary object of Dr. Girardeau, and of those
associated with him, was to prevent the Church from
committing itself to the doctrine of evolution, and
inculcating it as the truth, in one of its Theological
Schools. All other consequences came as unforeseen
afterthoughts, and as means to the chief end.

Looking backard, — was this painful controversy
wanton ? The tender-hearted, the saintly, the knightly
Girardeau went down to his grave under the displeas-
ure of some of his life-long friends, who always
thought he was needlessly alarmed. Has evolution
shown itself to be a harmless hypothesis which boded
no evil to the Scriptures, a mere romance in science
which had no bearings on the cause of Christ? What
is the story of its own evolution?

Today it is the regnant philosophy. It has over-
passed all the limits affixed by Dr. Woodrow. With
a reconstructing and reversing hand, it has swept the
whole gamut of the Christian Faith. Every theological
distress of the hour is traceable to its baleful influence.

It is applied to the Bible, to explain how the Chris-
tian Scriptures are but a product of a naturalistic
evolution, co-ordinate in kind with other so-called
sacred books, and so are neither inerrant nor final.

284 The Life Work of

It is applied to God, to explain how the Yahweh
of an oriental people has come to be the God of Chris-
tianity.

It is applied to religion, to explain how the religion
of a nomadic tribe of Asia has come to be the Chris-
tian religion of the most enlightened nations of
Europe.

It is applied to the fall, to explain away that moral
catastrophe by construing it as a mere miscarriage in
the evolution of the race.

One of its apostles (Bousset) in the household of
religion has recently said, with jubilation, "The con-
ception of redemption, the dogma of the divinity of
Christ, the doctrine of the Trinity, the idea of vicar-
ious sacrifice, the belief in the miraculous, in the old
view of revelation — we see how all these are swept
away in the stream of development."

These are conclusions which would have been
abhorrent to Dr. Woodrow ; and he often declared that
if he could see that any of them were really the fruits
of evolution, he would deny and disown the hypothesis.
Dr. Girardeau, on the other hand, felt sure that such
would be the wreckage, and so fought for his faith
as a man fights for his life. And now, on both sides
of the sea, the question that trembles upon the lip of
the world and challenges the Christian apologist is,
"Can the old faith live by the side of the new science?"

CHAPTER IX

THE PHILOSOPHER*

By Thornton Whaling, D. D., LL. D.

Dr. Girardeau was a many-sided man, who was
facile pHnceps in quite a number of different spheres,
and who filled a large place in the eye of the Church
as preacher, theologian, teacher, writer and ecclesiastic.
But there was one department in which he possessed
unsurpassed scholarship and in which he showed
remarkable gifts, and yet for various reasons the
Church at large has failed for a time to appraise him
at his true value in the field of philosophy, and in the
future when calm, catholic judgments have been
reached by the general mind of the Church he is
destined to be rated as a great philosophic thinker,
in fact taking high rank in the list of the philosophers
of the world in our day.

The reasons for the Church's temporary failure to
appraise him at his true value as a philosopher are
evident. As a flaming, eloquent, inspiring preacher,
possessed of every gift necessary to convince the rea-
son and fire the heart of the populace, he attracted
such commanding and general attention as to obscure
in the public mind for a season, his possession of
those entirely different order of gifts which make the
philosopher or metaphysician. And when the great
preacher proved to be a theologian and teacher of the
first order the conclusion was that his outfit of gifts

♦The substance of two articles published in The Union Seminary
Magazine.

286 The Life Work of

and achievements was exhausted; and when as an
ecclesiastic, debating the most difficult questions under
the eye of skilful antagonists, he proved one of the
most formidable of controversialists, it was scarcely
to be suspected that the flaming preacher, the learned
theologian, the wise teacher, the powerful debater
would have another order of gifts of a still higher
kind and in still higher degree, viz.: the patient and
penetrating intellect, the protracted induction of many
particulars, the masterful synthesis which grouped
details in grand generalizations, the analytic power
which resolved the most intricate problems into their
simplest elements, boldness and restraint, daring and
balance, all combined in stretching the tether of human
reason to its utmost limit and yet never losing the
sanity and poise which overstepped the bounds of just
reflection or speculation.

In addition to this, our day is not a metaphysical
period. For the time being, philosophy is at a dis-
count. The writings of Plato, Kant, Cousin and Ham-
ilton are not as widely read as a generation or two ago.
Science, physical science popularized, the novel, biog-
raphy, history made easy by dropping the difficult out
of sight, the magazine, the newspaper, these make the
staple of general reading. And even scholars decry
philosophy and taboo metaphysics as if it were dim
cloudland beyond the reach of human intelligence. Of
course this is a temporary and passing phase. It is a
sign of essential shallowness and mental incapacity.
The reign of reflection and the right of true science can
not be forever disallowed. The time will come when
knowledge of the phenomenal will nOt satisf^^ when
the voice of right reason and the deliverances of faith
will be heard and philosoplw will come to the throne.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 287

Meantime the philosopher, if he has "fit audience,*'
has also a small one, and Dr. Girardeau, though doing
a great work in this most important field and leaving
invaluable philosophic discussions beyond him (which
have since been published), has not yet secured the
recognition which his merit as a philosopher deserves.
The season is at hand, the Church today does not
appreciate as she will tomorrow or the next day, that
without philosophy there is no theology and without
theology there is no religion. And when this passing
craze for the shallow and the popular has passed and
the old demand of reason and faith for the real and
the metaphysical is again respected, the philosopher
of the Church will receive his rightful crown.

I venture to add, though treading on delicate
groimd, and yet I may venture as one who disagreed
with him on some of the issues involved, that the
ecclesiastical controversies which agitated the Church
from 1883 to 1890, for a season prevented some minds
from impartially and judicially recognizing the full
merits of Dr. Girardeau. No fault is here imputed to
any one on this account ; it was an inevitable result of
the circumstances of the hour. And it has passed or is
fast passing away. The time must speedily come when
the judicial weighing of the "Philosophic Discussions"
and the "Freedom of the Will" must procure for their
author a higher distinction, I think, than any of those
merited distinctions already his as preacher, theolo-
gian, teacher, writer and ecclesiastic, viz. : Our Church
will decide that he is her greatest philosopher.

Dr. Girardeau's standpoint is that of the Scotch
School of Common Sense, though he had that oecumen-
ical acquaintance with the history of philosophy

288 The Life Work of

which enabled him to ground most of the doctrines of
that School in the catholic conclusions to which the
great thinkers of all the ages have come as the result
of their reflective inquiries. Plato, Aristotle, Philo,
Kant, Cousin, Jacobi, Fichte, Schilling, Hegel were
at his fingers' ends as truly as Hamilton, Stewart and
Reid. The philosophic reflections of Athanasius
Origen, Augustine, Calvin, Edwards, scattered through
their writings had all been mastered by him. In short,
these names are merely samples recalled by an old
student's memory, and the whole field of the world's
metaphysical thought as far as reduced to writing had
passed under his studious and thoughtful gaze. Nor
was his philosophic reading confined to dusty tomes
or classic productions, but the latest word uttered by
any writer of any School had in him an instant and
critical hearer. For example. Bain, Spencer, Fiske,
Royce, Bowne, Ladd, James, all were subjected to the
inspection and review of his searching metaphysical
judgment and criticism. He belonged to the Scotch
School, not because he knew no other, but he belonged
to the Scotch School because he knew all the others
and knew that the essential doctrines of that School
were confirmed by the catholic conclusions of the
philosophers not of a passing day but of the ages and
of the world. He was not a slavish or timid adherent
of the School of Common Sense, for he brought into
still clearer explication, subjected to more searching
analysis, and set on still more evident right relation-
ship to each other, some of the fundamental doctrines
of this School, and in these respects his chief merit as a
philosopher is to be found. While not exhausting the
specifications, I will proceed to mention some of the
particulars in which Dr. Girardeau has made a dis-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 289

tinct advance in his exposition of the philosophy of
Common Sense : —

First. His exposition of consciousness contains dis-
tinctly new elements of truth as compared with the
doctrine upon this subject advanced by any of his pre-
decessors in this School. Consciousness, perception
and immediate knowledge are one and the same with
Dr. Girardeau. He differs from Reid's view, that we
are conscious of the act of perceiving an external
object but not of the object itself, and he differs from
the view of Hamilton that Ave are conscious of the act
of perceiving the external object. Dr. Girardeau main-
taining that the act of perceiving the external object
and the consciousness of that object are identical — it
is impossible to distinguish between the perception of
an external object and the consciousness of that object.
In the clear and irrefragable establishment of this
position, our Southern philosopher has rendered an
invaluable service to the cause of natural realism as
opposed to the theory of representative perception in
all of its forms of hypothetical realism, hypothetical
dualism or cosmothetic idealism, for Hamilton's view
that we perceive the external object as distinct from
the consciousness of that object logically involves the
doctrine of representative perception though in its
most unrecognized and sublimated form, especially
when it is coupled with Hamilton's further view that
the external object of perception is modified by the
mind, in fact, is itself but a mode of the stimulated
nervous organism or sensorium. Dr. Girardeau's doc-
trine is necessary in order to save the day for a phil-
osophic exposition of the dictum of common sense, as
all men naturally hold it, that in sense perception we
are directly conscious of an external object with which

290 The Life Work of

we know ourselves to be immediately in contact. The
perceiving act is itself an act of consciousness, for if
not, consciousness can only have a mediate knowledge
through perception of the external world and the
whole doctrine of our immediate consciousness of the
reality of the material object is surrendered.

Dr. Girardeau further advances the Scottish phil-
osophy in his proof that consciousness is not a generic
but a special faculty with a catholic relation to all the
other faculties. Consciousness cannot be the genus
under which all the cognitive powers are reduced as
species, because by its very nature and definition con-
sciousness is immediate knowledge, but these are facul-
ties of mediate knowledge, as memory, imagination,
thought (in the narrow sense of conception), and to
force these into unity would be to rub out that neces-
sary and invaluable distinction between immediate
and mediate knowledge so vital to philosophy, theo-
logy and religion. In inconsistently holding that all
forms of cognition are modes of consciousness, and that
therefore we really know nothing which we do not
immediately know the great Scotch philosopher Ham-
ilton laid himself open to the charge that the human
mind cannot know God, the soul, substance, cause,
those great realities which can only be mediately
known. In unduly elevating the importance of imme-
diate knoAvledge and depressing the value of mediate
knowledge, Hamilton was guilty of a philosophic sin,
from which the insight of Dr. Girardeau would save
this School, through the doctrine that consciousness or
perception, internal and external, is the faculty of
immediate knowledge, while there are coordinate fac-
ulties of mediate knowledge, the representative, the
thinking and the believing faculties. The supreme

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 291

import and scientific value of mediate knowledge is a
doctrine central to any sound philosophy, and Dr.
Girardeau gave it a setting and a defense, validating
it in the forum of right reason in higher degree than
any of the philosophers of this School, or, for that
matter, any of the current philosophers of the past.
The key to many of the problems which distress the
modern mind and perplexes much of so-called modern
theologizing is in this evidently patent but much neg-
lected distinction, whose clear recognition can alone
reduce to order our theories as to the powers and oper-
ations of the human reason and enable us to see, for
example, that though we can not bring God into the
field of consciousness and therefore immediately know
Him, we can, through the synthesis of faith and
thought, have a valid though mediate knowledge of
God, which enables us to say that we really know Him.
Second. Dr. Girardeau's exposition of the phil-
osophic nature of faith is one of his chief contribu-
tions to this great science. In fact, it is impossible to
find in the entire history of philosophic thought so
thorough and exhaustive an analysis and discussion
of the psychology of faith on the one hand and on the
other of its logical and rational relations to the realm
of ontology. A much needed service is rendered here
which clears up many perplexing questions which have
for ages afflicted philosophy and theology. As to its
psychology, faith is one of the mediate cognitive
powers. In Dr. Girardeau's system, the human reason
or intellect is the genus distributed into the two
species ; first, immediate knowledge or consciousness or
internal and external perception, and second, mediate
knowledge, still further distributed into the three
coordinate faculties, the representative, the thinking.

292 The Life Work of

the believing. The most important point here is to
distinguish between the thinking faculty or the power
of thought and the believing faculty or the power of
faith. All the other cognitive powers of the soul,
including thought, are confined within the region of
the phenomenal. The knowledge which they furnish
begins with consciousness in the form of perception
of our own mental modes or perception of external
objects; then next the representative faculty in the
form either of memory or imagination reproduces this
perceptive knowledge or combines it in new relations
or shapes. But no new elements can be added, for it
is impossible to re-present anything which has not been
first presented. Then the thinking faculties works
over in its processes the materials which have been fur-
nished by the perceptive or representative faculty, but
thought cannot transcend the phenomenal realm to
which both perception and representation are confined,
for it builds percepts into concepts, it receives the pro-
ducts of the presentative or representative power and
adds nothing save thought relations in creating its
OAvn thought products; the human reason is still
moving in the phenomenal world through the opera-
tions of all these faculties. But it is the very nature
of the believing faculty, of the power of faith to trans-
scend thought or the phenomenal realm in the appre-
hension of occult or transcendental realities. This con-
trast between thought and faith, between the thinking
and the believing faculty, while both are modes of
reason, received the singular and illumining emphasis
it needed in Dr. Girardeau's philosophy. Many phil-
osophers fail to grasp the distinction between the con-
cepts and abstract notions which thought builds and
the beliefs and faith- judgments which the believing

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 293

faculty delivers, and hence they grope in total dark-
ness before such questions as to the Knowableness or
Unknowableness of God. Their philosophy makes no
provision for the reply that while thought can not
conceive Him, the believing faculty can apprehend
and truly know Him. The true distinction is not
between faith and knowledge, but between thought-
knowledge and thought-]* udgments and faith-knowl-
edge and faith-judgments.

These beliefs exist, first, in the form of latent apti-
tudes or fundamental laws of belief at the root of the
believing faculty, and while they furnish the condi-
tions of experience they are elicited into formal expres-
sion by experience itself. That is, the operations of
the perceptive, representative, comparative or thought
faculties furnish the occasions upon which as neces-
sary and immediate inferences from the data furnished
by these powers the mind or reason affirms these beliefs
or faith- judgments, in which new elements of cogni-
tion and reality are added to the products of the other
cognitive powers. Such, for example, are our con-
victions as to Space, Duration, Substance, Cause, Per-
sonality and the Infinite. None of these are concepts
or notions built by thought or the elaborative or com-
parative faculty, and which therefore can be analyzed
into the elements out of which they are constructed.
They are inconceivable or incogitable in the sense that
the thinking faculty did not make them nor can it
resolve them into their constituent parts; but they are
not unknowable or incognoscible, because the believing
faculty apprehends and knows them. They can not
be comprehended by thought, but they are affirmed
and known bv faith.

294 The Life Work of

If pressed for a definition of faith, Dr. Girardeau
would answer, that it is intellectual assent grounded
upon testimony. It therefore discharges a double
office: first, it is a voucher for the other powers as
when, for example, we perceive an external object and
therefore immediately know or are conscious of its
presence, we say we believe in its existence. We do
not mean that our consciousness or immediate knowl-
edge of the object is one with our faith; they are not
the same. We know the object through consciousness
and this knowledge is buttressed by the faith we have
in the testimony of our consciousness. Our faith sus-
tains this catholic relation to all our cognitic powers,
presentative. representative, comparative; we know
through these powers and we know through the faith
we have in these powers. In other words, our faith
in the testimony of these faculties is a knowledge that
these powers in their normal activities are trustworthy.
Secondly, faith discharges another office in originating
knowledge which is beyond the reach of the other cog-
nitive powers. ''Our believing power forms judgment
as to existence beyond the reach of consciousness and
thought. They are faith-judgments; and faith-judg-
ments are as valid grounds of knowledge as are
thought-judgments." The contribution which Dr.
Grirardeau has rendered to philosophy and theology in
making clear and scoring deep these distinctions,
entitles him to the philosophic crown. The antinomies
with which philosophers have struggled can all be set-
tled here : the antilogies of Kant, Hamilton and Man-
sel, all disappear before this ripe and rational phil-
osophy. The conciliation of reason and faith which
has been the dream of countless aspiring minds is an
accomplished fact, for reason has no higher power

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 295

than faith, and the human intellect finds its glory as
a wondrous organism made by its divine Author, to
know both Him and His World in its believing faculty
by which transcendental realities and the Infinite God
are brought within the reach of human apprehension
and knowledge. The student who had learned these
great principles from Dr. Girardeau had a guide which
directed him safely through all the mazes and per-
plexities of modern thought, and was unscathed and
unharmed by the fierce conflict which false and oppos-
ing philosophies waged upon the truth. Here, evi-
dently, was the key to true philosophy, and he who
was ever privileged, as many of us are grateful we
were, to hear this master expounder of his own phil-
osophy, explain and enforce his doctrine of faith in
the fields of psychology, ontology and theology have
found no subsequent reason to doubt that the everlast-
ing rock was solid beneath our feet. The philosophy of
religion has therefore had no abler exponent or more
convincing expounder in the history of our Church,
and the time has come when his reward is sure, for the
service he has done for multitudes of students, and
which he will continue to do for all who will carefully
read the books which he has left behind him. His
"Philosophic Discussions" ought to be a text-book in
all our Theological Seminaries.

Third. Dr. Girarddeau's doctrine as to the Will is a
distinct philosophic and theological advance in this
vexed field. According to his view, the will is the
power in which the causal efficiency of the soul resides
and through which the man determines or originates
his own acts. The will, therefore, in a derived, depen-
dent and limited sense is a first cause, that is, the will
originates not new being in the sense of substance, but

29G The Life Work of

originates phenomenal changes within the soul itself.
In the analysis of the will there is found besides this
inherent spontaneity or causal efficiency : first, a nisiis
toward action produced by the impulse of the feelings
upon the will, described in the terms conation or the
velleitas of the schoolmen, and second, deliberate elec-
tion, choice, volition or the arhityium of the scholastics.
The distinction between the freedom of the man and
the freedom of the will has no rightful place, since
the will is the very power of action through which the
fredom of the man is expressed, and if the will be
enslaved or necessitated, the man is enslaved or neces-
sitated. The distinction between liberty and ability
also disappears, for to say a man is able to do holy
acts is to affirm that he is free to do these acts, and to
deny his ability to do holy acts, is to deny his freedom
to do these acts. Of course, liberty and ability may
be affirmed in one sense of the man, and then be both
denied in another sense to the same man, but ability
cannot be affirmed of this man and then in the same
reference liberty be denied him. The distinction
between natural and moral ability has no real validity,
for the only natural ability must of necessity be moral
if it have any existence at all. To deny moral is also
to deny natural ability. A valid distinction of great
value which would be of great service is that between
natural — moral ability and spiritual ability. The first
may and does exist in multitudes of cases, while the
second is not possessed. The terms necessity and lib-
erty with Dr. Girardeau are correlatives. Necessity
may mean first, the relation between resistless physical
force and the effect it produces, the necessity of co-ac-
tion or compulsion; or second, it may mean the relation
between any influence and the results which certainly

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 297

and unavoidably flow from it — what is termed moral
necessity. Viewed in reference to the first kind of
necessity, liberty is the absence of compulsion or the
power to do as one pleases without constraint or
restraint. Considered in reference to the second kind
of necessity, liberty is the power to act voluntarily but
unavoidably, or it is the power to act voluntarily but
contingently. Freedom to act voluntarily but unavoid-
ably consists w^ith certainty or moral necessity, since
the spontaneity or dispositions or habitus of the soul
determines the acts; but the power to act voluntarily
but contingently is inconsistent with any kind of
necessity, since a contingent act is one which may or
may not happen. The liberty of contingency, there-
fore, and the power of contrary choice — facultas aliter
se determinandi — are one and the same.

This brings up the age-long debate between the
advocates of Necessitarianism or Determinism or
moral necessity or certainty on the one hand and those
who maintain that the Freedom of the Will neces-
sarily and always involves the power of otherwise
determining or choosing between alternatives, in other
words, the Power of Contrary Choice. Dr. Girar-
deau's skill and patience and philosophic insight are
seen in the successful way in which he threads the
mazes of this intricate and perplexing theme. He
holds the theory of Determinism in reference to God
and the elect angels and glorified saints and the human
will of Christ, for it is evident that in these cases the
holy dispositions or subjective spontaneity effectively
control the volitions and acts. The theory of Deter-
minism also holds in relation to fallen and unregen-
erate men whose unholy dispositions of necessity con-
trol their volitions and acts, since by their sins they

298 The Life Work of

are deprived of communion with God, the only source
of holiness, and since the penal sentence of the vio-
lated law rests upon them. But Determinism will not
explain the strategic case of Adam. His dispositions
were all holy, but his volition to sin traversed and
dashed down those dispositions. In order to fit Adam
for his probation — not to make him free — there was
added to his spontaneity the power of contrary choice.
He was given Freedom of the will not in the sense of
the power to act voluntarily, but in the sense of the
power to act contingently, that is, of otherwise deter-
mining or choosing between alternatives. And in the
exercise of this power of contrary choice he overrode
his own holy spontaneity and dispositions, and since
his sin severed the bond which united him to God and
brought upon him the curse of the law, his holy dis-
positions were substituted by unholy dispositions and
he came under the penal necessity of expressing these
sinful dispositions by corresponding volitions and
acts — a necessity which his descendants share with
him. Nor will Determinism apply fully to the case of
regenerate and imperfectly sanctified men, who have
two subjective spontaneities, the one holy, the other
sinful, and whose choice sometimes approves the one,
sometimes the other. And even in the case of unre-
generate men. Determinism, while holding in the
spiritual realm, does not always hold in the natural,
civil or merely moral spheres. The conduct of life,
the administration of government, our judgments of
self and others, are all grounded on the belief that men
have the power within these limits of otherwise deter-
mining. This is not a deliverance of consciousness,
but it is an inference which men well-nigh universally
draw from the data of consciousness.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 299

But the case of Adam is the test which explodes
Determinism or moral necessity as a complete theory
of the will or an exhaustive interpretation of the Free-
dom of the Will. If Adam's subjective dispositions
must effectively control his will, then Adam would
have remained holy until this day; for it is not sup-
posable that God gave him unholy dispositions at
creation, for this w^ould make God the real author of
Adam's sin and w^ould make it impossible to impute
guilt to the sinner who sinned by necessity from the
very nature which God created within him. Adam as
a non-elect probationer, had the power of otherwise
determining, and in the use of this perilous form of
freedom or power of contrary choice, he sinned in the
very teeth of his own holy inclinations and disposi-
tions. Dr. Girardeau's wonderful powers of analysis,
and the combined acuteness and penetration with
which he saw into the heart of every problem, robbed
of all its accidental or non-essential qualities, is
nowhere more evident than in the striking and con-
vincing discussion in which he expounds the first sin
of our first parents. Following a clue which had been
given by Bishop Butler he shows how the blind
impulses or appetencies implanted in Adam's original
constitution were the avenues through which the temp-
tation to the first sin came. Hunger or the desire for
the beautiful fruit, and curiosity or the desire for
greatly increased knowledge, were appetencies which,
had no moral quality in themselves and which could
receive moral quality only as they were directed to
forbidden objects. These blind impulses were aroused
and inflamed not by the subjective spontaneity but by
the art of the tempter in addressing Eve. Nor was
the force which they possessed derived from any pre-

300 The Life Work of

vious activity of the understanding: on the contrary,
they determined the views of the understanding as to
the desirability of the forbidden objects; so that with-
out deriving motivity from subjective dispositions or
without precedent acts of the understanding, these
blind impulses smote directly upon the will and
clamored for gratification. The exact function of the
will was to elect between the motives springing from
the holy spontaneity and the gratification for which
the appetencies begged. The will had the power to
approve either in this supremely strategic test case.
In the case of Adam, instead of the blind impulses of
hunger and curiosity, we must substitute the powerful
appetencies and sympathies which bound him to Eve
and which he elected to endorse rather than his own
holy inclinations or dispositions, though it meant that
he must break with his God and ruin his race. Dr.
Girardeau has put his finger upon the solution of the
puzzle right at this point and his commentary on the
first sin is as fine an illustration of philosophy and
theologA^ combined as can be found in the history of
the American Church.

Our distinguished philosopher has to a certain
extent been misunderstood by some, who failed to
grasp his whole doctrine of the Will. He was in r)art
a Determinist, that is, in the several cases of God, the
elect angels, glorified saints, our Lord's human will,
unregenerate men as under a penal necessity of sin-
ning; but according to his view. Determinism is not a
completely satisfactory theory for it does not provide
for the case of Adam, or partially sanctified regenerate
men, or fallen and unregenerate men in the field of the
natural and the merely moral. In particular this
theory fails to discriminate as it should between

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 301

motives as final and efficient causes. The theory
asserts that the motives or the intention effectually
control the decision of the will, and this is usually
interpreted to mean that the motives as efficient cause
necessitate in one specific direction the election of the
will. This throws the seat of inherent causuality m
the soul from the will to the motives or desires and
revolutionizes the catholic beliefs of the race and the
conclusions of sound philosophy; moreover, it misin-
terprets the function of motives which serve as the
final causes in accordance with which the will acts
and not necessarily as efficient causes controlling and
mastering the will. For example, the glory of God is
the final cause of man's salvation, but it is not the
efficient cause which secures this result, and the motives
or intention show us the end which the will has in
view, but they are not the efficient cause of the will's
action, for that efficient cause is the will itself. Again,
the theory that the last view of the understanding
decides and determines the election of the will is con-
tradicted by the instance of the blind impulses or
appetencies which without and prior to endorsement
by the understanding smote upon the will and ask for
indulgence. These impulses are called blind by Butler,
precisely because independently of the understanding
they seek gratification ; of course, they emerge in con-
sciousness or the soul would know nothing of them,
but their motivety or impulsive powers is in no wise
due to the understanding. In this capital example,
both of these aspects of Determinism are negatived
and vetoed, and its sufficiency as a complete theory of
Free- Agency in all of its possible forms is disproven.

But I cannot pursue this subject further — Dr. Girar-
deau's "Freedom of the Will in its Theological Kela-

302 The Life Work of

tions" expounds these views with a sun-like clearness
and a massive simplicity which are a delight to the
earnest student. The human mind has made in this
book its farthest advance into this vexed and debated
field. And the Signal Service rendered is to show
that Calvinism is in the most essential harmony with
the only sound and rational philosophy. I wish that
this able and convincing discussion were mastered by
all our ministers and officers, the inevitable result
would be the calm and immovable conviction of the
rationality, as well as Scripturalness of that system of
doctrine which Paul, Augustine, Calvin, the great
Eeformed Confessions and a long list of theologians
all hold as the sum and substance of the revealed
Word and as in perfect harmony with right reason,
when the insight of a real philosopher obtains for us
the reason's true deliverances.

This is a very inadequate representation of the
cogency and convincingness of Dr. Girardeau's views
upon these great themes and of the value of his other
discussions of the standing problems of the human
reason, for scattered through his works one will find
a complete philosophy, not formally, but virtually
elaborated. Dr. Girardeau largely confined himself
to the perennial problems of pure philosophy and his
extensive philosophical library showed his mastery of
the thinking of all the world's masters in this realm
and upon the basis of this oecumenical knowledge he
builded the structure of his life-work in the erection
of his philosoj^hical system; and when the coming
revival of philosophy, which is as sure to come as the
human reason remains the same with its inexorable
demands for satisfaction in the reduction of all its

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 303

knowledge to unity in the valid and philosophic knowl-
edge of the First Cause and the First Substance, shall
have arrived, then Dr. Girardeau will receive the
crown which is his due as the Philosopher of the
Southern Presbyterian Church.

CHAPTER X

THE THEOLOGIAN

By Thornton Whaling, D. D.. LL. D.

Dr. Girardeau was the most philosophic of theolo-
gians, but his interest in philosophy was not for its
own sake, but for the necessary service which true
philosophy renders to a sound theology. The two
cannot be divorced and the attempt, as in Ritschlian-
ism and that strange abortion. Pragmatism, only ends
in the importation of a radically false and vitiating
philosophy under a slender disguise into the theologi-
cal system. In fact the two are united in the Revealed
Word, for there is a biblical philosophy as there is a
biblical theology; and we cannot really accept the
Revealed theology if we refuse the Revealed phil-
osophy— they are so builded together as to be one and
inseparable. The three great departments of phil-
osophy, ethics, psychology, ontology or metaphysics
proper, all have adequate representation in the inspired
Word. Ethics, which treats of such subjects as the
nature, ground, standard of duty and like topics, evi-
dently constitutes a considerable section of Revelation,
and Christian Ethics infallibly taught in the Bible is
an indispensable part of the divine book, which ought,
by the way, to receive more attention than it does in
our theological education and pulpit exposition. Psy-
chology, which treats of the mental and psychical
powers and activities of the human being, is both pre-
supposed and unfolded in the Word, so that a biblical
psychology is an easy and evident science. If the

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D, 305

Bible does not teach that man is a spiritual being with
capacities, to perceive, remember, know, believe, feel
and will, then nothing can ever be taught in the lan-
guages of men. Ontology or metaphysics in the nar-
row sense which treats of fundamental reality is
wrought into the very texture of the revealed Word,
in its testimony to the existence of God, Spirit, Mat-
ter, Cause, Substance and the relations between these.
Christian Theism and Natural Theology in perfect
form are not the unaided discoveries of human reason,
but are republished and expounded in the Written
Word. Philosophy in this sense of the biblical ethics,
psychology and ontology underlies the whole structure
of the theology of redemption which is thus builded
upon these philosophic pre-suppositions. Dr. Girar-
deau's profound interest in philosophy therefore rested
upon the base of the inherently necessary service which
as an ally and handmaid j)hilosophy must render to
the "queen of all the sciences."

At the same time, Dr. Girardeau was one of the most
biblical of theologians. Careful, grammatical and
logical exegesis, according to the most approved meth-
ods of interpretation so as to teach the real meaning
of the Word were applied, and when the deliverances
of the divine Revelation were reached they were
accepted without a question as final and authoritative.
But he regarded it as a legitimate and necessary pro-
cedure for the scientific and systematic theologian to
take these deliverances into the forum of human rea-
son and to interrogate philosophy whether it had any
words to speak in confirmation or elucidation of the
inspired teachings. And exactly at this point his chief
distinction as a theologian of the very first order
appears, that he married philosophy and theology

306 The Life Work of

with consummate skill into a harmonious union where
no discordant and contradictory words were spoken
by the two parties so happily and fittingly mated in
this great expounder's system. He is a master in show-
ing how the divine reason in the Book and human
reason in philosophy both speak with consenting voice
upon every theme where they make common or joint
deliverances, and even in the strictly supernatural
realm where the divine testimony alone is heard, he
still remains the philosophic master in showing that
philosophy has no word of counter or divergent testi-
mony to utter. This is the title by which he holds the
future and the evidence that he will surely come to
his own in the recognition that he is entitled to the
loftiest place as an interpreter of the Calvinistic theo-
logy, for he is without any superior in the signal skill
and success with which he demonstrates that theology
is endorsed and confirmed by philosophy wherever
philosophy speaks at all, and that in no case does true
philosophy utter a word of protest or dissent from the
teachings of a sound and scriptural theology. False
systems like Pelagianism, Socinianism, Arminianism,
the new theology in all its forms, are ground to pow-
der, not simply by showing that they have no support
in God's Word, but that they also have no standing
before a rational philosophy. And upon the unsur-
passed skill with which he discharges this highest
function of the systematic theologian, his renown will
finally rest, when the sober judgment of an informed
church has come to appraise him at his true value.

It deserves to be added also that Dr. Girardeau was
a loj^al and consistent Confessional theologian. All
the Reformed Symbols were much used and quoted
by him and the Westminster Standards in particular

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 307

were first set in their proper relations to the Scrip-
tures as clearly taught therein; and then second, with
no less clearness these Standards were set in their
right relations to right thinking and approved truth.
He had an extensive acquaintance with the writings
of the Westminster divines which illuminated and
guided his use of the Westminster Symbols. There
was no other theologian with whom he had greater
mental and spiritual affinities than with John Calvin
himself, and the great Genevan has never had one who
more thoroughly and carefully mastered his Institutes
and other books than our Columbia professor. He was
no slavish follower of the great Reformed theologian,
but when he differed from him it was only after the
most careful and mature reflection. No theologian of
our day has studied Calvin more, lived with him longer
or understood him better. There were striking intel-
lectual and spiritual affinities between the two, coming
of the same race and built largely on the same model
as to mental constitution. Both original minds of the
first order, both philosophic by the very necessities of
their individual endowments, and both architectonic
by inevitable instinct. AVhile widely read in both
ancient and modern theology, Calvin and Thornwell
influenced him more largely than any others. As a
student at Charleston College and Columbia Theologi-
cal Seminary he came under the spell of the great
Dr. James Henley Thornwell, then at the zenith of
his career as a preacher and teacher. Though never a
student in the class-room of Thornwell, either at the
South Carolina College or Theological Seminary, the
impress of his fellow-Carolinian was deeply scored
upon the heart and mind of the young minister who
finallv came to fill so worthilv the same chair of theo-

308 The Life Work of

logy in the Columbia school. These names will always
be united in the splendid history of that noble school
and the theology of Thornwell and Girardeau will
doubtless continue to represent for generations the
spirit of this favored Seminary. It was Dr. Girar-
deau's good fortune to succeed Dr. Thornwell after an
interval of some years, and, building upon the good
foundation laid by his predecessor, to carry on to
virtual comiDletion his own system of theology. Dr.
Girardeau's debt to Thornwell was a large one, not so
much for the amount of positive contributions made
to his thinking and his sj^stem, as for the impulse and
spirit communicated to him by his predecessor.

I. In selecting some specimens of Dr. Girardeau's
theologizing, the first instance which falls to be men-
tioned is found in the field of Introductory Theology
in his answer to the objection that theology cannot
really be a science, because it involves an infinite and
therefore an inconceivable and indefinable element,
and since the thinking faculty which is the organ of
science cannot handle an inconceivable element, there
cannot therefore be a valid theological science.

Our theologian's reply is, that every science begins
with an indemonstrable, inconceivable and indefinable
element. Such is the Soul with which metaphysics
begins. Such is personality with which law begins,
continues and ends. Such is life with which Medicine
deals. Such is Substance, upon which all the physical
sciences rest. The infinite is no more indefinable than
is the Soul, Life, Substance. Further, the infinite is
a datum furnished by Kevelation. If the Scriptures
are proven to be from God, theology may accept an
infinite God as validly as the other sciences their prin-
cipia. Moreover, it is incorrect to represent the infinite

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 309

God and his perfections as reached by the thinking
faculty alone. The statement of the Pseudo-Dionysius
that Ave reach the infinite God by causation, negation
and eminence is philosophically false. In arguing
from causation, we use the category of cause which is
not a concept or the product of the thinking or logical
faculty, but is a fundamental belief. In reaching the
infinite attributes of God we do not negatively think
away all limitations or imperfections; as for example
with the attribute of power, which is again not a con-
cept produced by the thought power, but which is a
fundamental faith. In no case do we perceive, imagine
or conceive the attributes of God, but we believe them.
Nor can we by way of eminence heighten finite con-
cepts by the thinking faculty or the power of logical
elaboration until we reach the infinite. Pile Pelion
upon Ossa, add finite to finite and you still have the
finite. While the infinite is not reached by the discur-
sive understanding or the thinking faculty in the nar-
row and correct sense of the power which forms con-
cepts, yet we do have a valid apprehension and real
knowledge of the infinite. Upon conditions of expe-
rience through the knowledge by the thinking faculty
of the finite around us and within us there is developed
that fundamental law of belief which enables and
necessitates the apprehension and knowledge of the
infinite, thus reached by faith or belief, which is as
truly rational knowledge as is thought or the discur-
sive understanding or the faculty of logical elabora-
tion. The infinite is known by a faith- judgment which
is as true an exercise of reason as is the formation of
concepts by the thought power in the technical sense.

How are these fundamental faiths or beliefs, e. g.^ in
the infinite, substance, cause known? They are at first

310 The Life Work of

latent underneath consciousness in the form of apti-
tudes or tendencies or laws, but upon the conditions of
experience they appear in consciousness in the form
of beliefs. It must be noted that though we are con-
scious of the beliefs, we are not conscious of the things
believed. The beliefs appear immediately in conscious-
ness, but the objects about w^hich the beliefs are con-
cerned do not immediately present themselves to con-
sciousness and are therefore not immediately known.
We are conscious of a belief in personality, substance,
cause, the infinite in its three forms — as the infinite
God, infinite space, infinite duration, but we are not
conscious of personality, substance, cause, the infinite
in any of its forms. The beliefs thus appearing in con-
sciousness are of the nature of internal percepts and
by the thinking faculty can be wrought over into con-
cepts and thus be made the objects of metaphysical
analysis and logical elaboration. But the transcendent
realities to which these beliefs relate are not percepts,
and they cannot be wrought over into concepts by the
thinking faculty; substance, cause, the infinite are
neither percepts nor concepts, but they are funda-
mental faiths or beliefs reached by a different faculty
from that which builds concepts out of percepts as
does the thinking faculty in the technical sense, and
this faculty which some philosophers denominate intu-
ition. Dr. Girardeau describes as faith or the believing
faculty.

The question recurs, of what avail is it from the
standpoint of science for the thought-power to have
concepts of these beliefs when it cannot form concepts
of the transcendent realities with which these beliefs
are concerned? The answer is, the thinking faculty
can certainly deal with the manifestations or phenom-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 311

ena of these transcendent realities; and it is just these
phenomena which furnish the material of the largest
part of all the sciences. Moreover, the thinking fac-
ulty as one rational power, can receive from the believ-
ing faculty as another rational power, the contribu-
tions which faith or belief makes to the science which
is in process of construction, and such contributions
are made by belief to all the sciences physical, meta-
physical and theological. Theology is in no sense
singular because elements which trenscend the think-
ing or concept building power enter into every science
and such elements are the contributions of funda-
mental faiths or belief which are necessary and well-
nigh universal. In addition, there is a wonderful
synergism of thought and faith, of the thinking and
the believing faculty, in combining their processes and
results. Thought is concerned with both matter and
form, that is, both with the truth and the logical shape
of the materials with which it deals, and thought pre-
sides over all logical processes so as to secure not only
scientific form but also scientific truth as the result.
Faith in the same way presides as co-sovereign in
securing truth in its contributions toward the com-
bined result. It deserves to be said, that it is the same
man who perceives and thinks and believes and rea-
sons; and if thought can receive the results of the pre-
sentative and representative powers and employ them
in its own peculiar processes, why not receive the con-
tributions of these fundamental beliefs, of which the
chief is our belief in the infinite, and employ them also.
Further, of course, in one sense it is obviously true
that the infinite is indefinable because the infinite God
is the ultimate being. There is no higher genus under
which He can be subsumed as a species, and there can

312 The Life Work of

be no lower species into which his whole essence may
enter. But yet in another sense He may be defined, as,
for example, the genus being is of two kinds, finite and
infinite, and the specific difi'erence is that which dis-
tinguishes the infinite from the finite. Theologians
who deny in one sense that the infinite God is con-
ceivable or definable, yet in another sense, proceed to
give us a definition, as, for example, the "Westminster
divines who assign God to the genus spirit, and then
proceed to give his specific qualities in his attributes —
"God is a spirit infinite, eternal and unchangeable in
his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness
and truth."

In this Avay our philosophical theologian shows us
that theology can not be justly impeached as a science
upon the ground that it contains an element which is
inconceivable in that the thinking faculty cannot com-
pass it, for the same objection would vitiate all the
sciences inasmuch as each one in turn employs elements
marked by the same character of inconceivability by
the logical understanding, but all these elements alike
belong to the category of valid knowledge reached by
the human reason in its highest mode of exercise in
the faculty which is the seat of the first principles or
fundamental faiths or beliefs. The infinite therefore
is as surely known by the reason as the finite, though,
of course, b}' a specifically different rational power,
and theolog}^ ji^istly and scientifically uses the infinite
in its organization and construction.

If space permitted Dr. Girardeau's definition and
distribution of theology, his reduction of Mysticism
and Romanism to Rationalism, his masterly argument
for plenary verbal inspiration upon necessary phil-
osophic grounds would be presented for some expo-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 313

sition, but the reader is referred to his "Theological
Discussions" for the complete and satisfactory enun-
ciation of his striking original views upon these great
themes.

II. His Statement of the Arguments for the Divine
Being in the field of Theology proper is worthy of
note.

He proposes to give a reflective construction of the
spontaneous process by which the native tendencies to
believe in the infinite God are developed into actual
faith. The argument is neither exclusively a priori
nor exclusively a posteriori^ but a combination of both.
The statement is sometimes made that the a priori
argument is one from cause to effect, and the a pos-
teriori argument is one from effect to cause. The first
part of the statement is too narrow because not simply
the law of casuality, but all the fundamental beliefs
of the mind are employed, and the second part is also
too narrow in that the argument is based upon all the
conditions of experience. In brief, "The argument tor
the existence of God is derived from the fundamental
laws of our constitution in connection with the facts
of experiences."

In the actual construction of the argument, we first
use the fundamental law of existence, by which upon
actual experience we necessarily affirm existence of
ourselves and the world around us. We use next the
law of casuality, which elicited into expression by con-
scious experience, forms the faith-judgment that every
perceivable existence and every phenomenal change
must have had a cause. This part of the argument is
two-fold: (1) First, beginning from the contingency
and changeahleness of the w^orld. That the world is
contingent and changeable, we know by consciousness

314 The Life Work of

and observation. Whatever is contingent and change-
able began. If the world began, it must have had a
cause. This cause must have been either in itself or
out of itself. If in itself, it was spontaneously pro-
duced, which is neither conceivable nor believable. If
the cause was out of itself it must have been a neces-
sary, self-existent first cause, for if it were contingent
you strike the regression to infinity of a series of finite
contingent causes, which cannot be accepted, as each
one of the series is contingent and what is true of all
the parts is true of the whole. We are conducted,
therefore, to a necessary first cause. (2) The argu-
ment may proceed from the -flniteness of the world.
That is finite Avhich is limited and conditioned. We
know ourselves to be limited and conditioned by con-
sciousness. Matter is limited and conditioned because
divisible into parts, each of which limits and condi-
tions the other. The world of matter and spirits is
thus limited and conditioned and therefore finite.
Whatever is finite began. If it began, it had a cause.
This cause must be in itself or out of itself. If in
itself, it is spontaneously produced which makes the
world both cause and effect at one and the same. If
the cause was out of itself, it must have been a neces-
sary first cause, or you strike the regression to infinity
of a contingent series. We arrive, therefore, at a neces-
sary first cause.

The argument next employs the law of substance, in
accordance with which we immediately infer that
properties inhere in a substance, or mediately infer
upon the perception of the manifestation of power
that this power is to be construed as an attribute and
referred to a substance or essence in which it inheres
as a quality. This fundamental faith is of use to pre-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 315

vent our interpretation of the first cause with Herbert
Spencer as an "infinite eternal energy," and to lead
to the knowledge that the first cause is also the first
substance in which the power manifest in causation
inheres as an attribute. The argument next uses the
law of personality. We are indubitably convinced that
we are persons and we ask the Spencerian evolutionist
how an impersonal force, which they affirm the first
cause to be, could have evolved into personal beings,
possessing marks which are not implied in the evolving
force, or inquire of the Pantheist how impersonal sub-
stance, which is his first cause, could have been wrought
over into personal substances, possessing this high
mark of personality which his original substance did
not wear. We can give no other just account of our
own personality than to affirm personality of the first
cause. "The argument next advances from the funda-
mental law of belief in the infinite to the infinity of
the substantive, personal first cause." This belief in
the infinite developed upon conditions of experience
is native to the human mind as shown by the belief
in infinite space and infinite duration and the well-
nigh universal belief in the infinite God ; and sufficient
reasons can be given to show why it is not admitted
as absolutely universal. In fact, the finite and infinite
are correlative and the knowledge of them is correla-
tive. It is impossible to know one without knowing
the other. The mode in which they are known are
different; the faculties by which they are known are
not the same. The finite is known by the presenta-
tive, representative and thinking faculties; the infinite
is known by the believing faculty. But the one knowl-
edge is just as valid as is the other. We have now
been conducted to a necessary, substantive, personal.

316 The Life Work of

infinite first cause. This is the Cosmological argument
in substance, which is not complete by itself but needs
to be complemented by the teleological or, as Kant calls
it, the physic-theological argument. In fact, they are
not different arguments, but branches of the one in-
divisble, inseparable proof of the divine existence. As
God is one the proof of His existence is one.

The teleological argument is based upon the funda-
mental laws of unity, causation and sufficient reason.
Amidst the bewildering complexity of the world round
about us, the human reason is forced to seek and find
a principle of unity by the very necessities of its con-
stitution. This fundamental faith is satisfied by the
impression of order which pervades all the compli-
cated phenomena of nature and history and signally
gratified by the marvellous adaptations which reign
both in the realm of the great and the small in the
natural world. From the analogy of human experience
we are forced to affirm a final cause for all this wide
supremacy of orderliness and law, and also to postu-
late an efficient cause as it organizing and guiding
intelligence. Combined with this the law of sufficient
reason, whether contemplated as a law of thought or
of objective reality, requires the affirmation of a cause
of adequate wisdom and power to account for all the
beautiful harmony and rational purpose which evi-
dently pervades nature through and through, in the
vast procession of the planets and in no less degree
in the realm of the infinitesimal which the microscope
reveals. When united with the Cosmological argu-
ment the teleological therefore conducts us to an infi-
nite personal first cause and first substance w^ho is the
Creator and as well the organizer and governor of
the world.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 317

Dr. Girardeau gives us a just and profound criticism
of the so-called ontological argument as presented by
Anslem and afterwards modified though not improved
by Leibnitz. Anselm's argument is that we have the
concept of an absolutely perfect being which involves
as one of its elements necessity of existence, and this
in turn actual existence. Kant's criticism is very
acute, as follows, viz., that to pass from the concept
of an ideal perfect being to that of an actual perfect
being requires either an analytical or synthetical judg-
ment. Now if it be an analytical judgment, which
affirms in the predicate something already contained
in the subject, we have made no advance, for we may
deny objectivity or actuality both of the subject and
the predicate. If it be synthetical which affirms in the
predicate something not already contained in the sub-
ject, as actuality or objectivity of existence is affirmed
in the predicate of an ideal or subjective existence in
the subject, then the judgment must not be assumed
but proved, which remains to be done in some other
way; and the argument is worthless. Dr. Girardeau's
criticism is equally weighty and philosophic to the
effect, that there can be no concept of an absolutely
perfect being, and an argument built on this hypothesis
is therefore vitiated. A concept is built by the thought
power out of material furnished by the percepts of
the presentative or the re-presentations of the repre-
sentative power. Thought, therefore, cannot transcend
consciousness. It is unphilosophic to say that we can
perceive or represent God, and therefore the thought
faculty can form no concept of Him, and to build an
argument on this imaginary foundation leads, of
course, only to imaginary results. The road by which
the human reason passes from the finite to the infinite

318 The Life Work of

is negatively not the path of sense-perception, nor of
the representative power in its two forms of memory
or imagination, nor of the thinking faculty or the dis-
cursive understanding or faculty of logical elaboration
which builds or handles concepts, but it is a royal high-
way along which the noblest rational power or the
believing faculty travels. The infinite is a faith- judg-
ment. It is called by some the product of rational
intuition, but intuition is too equivocal a term,
employed as it is to denominate the presentative power.
The infinite is reached by the human reason through
its highest power or function, when all its other and
lower powers developed by experience have done their
work and discharged their functions, then the reason
in its highest power and faculty, viz. : faith, or the
believing faculty, affirms, apprehends and knows the
infinite. It is a fundamental faith or belief native to
the human reason which needs only the concrete facts
of experience to develop it from latency into actual and
inevitable expression.

Dr. Girardeau, of course, uses with great force the
moral argument for the divine being and also the argu-
ment equally valid from man's religious nature; but
the largest contribution in this section of theology has
been his demonstration of the unity of the cosmologi-
cal and teleological arguments as furnishing the one
indivisible proof of God's existence. He has shown
how every part of man's constitution and all the facts
of experience combine their consentient testimony to
this great basal truth of philosophy and theology that
there is an infinite, personal, necessary first cause and
first substance who is the Creator and organizer and
governor of the world. And in the nature of the case,
he could have rendered no higher service than to place

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 319

this argument on an absolutely impregnable philos-
oi:)hic foundation.

III. In the department of Anthropology, his doc-
trine of the origin of the first sin in the free and unhin-
dered self-determination of the first man and his
account of the derivation of the guilt of the first sin
to the whole human race shows his combined philoso-
phic and theological gifts in the highest degree. No
theory which holds that Adam's spontaneity effectively
controlled his volitions, can meet the demands of phil-
osophy for a rational account of this sin or can escape
the objections which theology would bring that God
is inevitably made the author of this first sin on this
hypothesis. If Adam's holy spontaneity had deter-
mined infallibly his volitions, he would have remained
holy unto this day. In the use of the perilous power
of the self-determination of the will, given to him to
fit him for his probation, he freely and unnecessarily
originated his own sinful volition and act and as a
result, his own sinful spontaneity and dispositions.
However false the theory of the self-determination of
the will may be in its universal application to men
now, no other hypothesis will meet the necessities of
the case in the instance of the first man and the first
sin.

But we are more especially concerned with the expla-
nation of the imputation of the guilt of the first sin
to the whole race which is presented by Dr. Girardeau.
There are three theories which fall to be considered:
1st, Parentalism; 2d, Realism; 3d, Federal Headship.
Of these in their order :

(1) Parentalism is the explanation which Arminian-
ism offers as best solving the difficulties of the case.
The following are the objections which, in substance,

320 The Life Work of

Dr. Girardeau presents as showing the untenableness
of Parent alism. First, the Arminians themselves
admit that the visitation of the bitter consequences of
Adam's sin upon his descendants could not be vindi-
cated unless these were joined with the decree to per-
mit the first sin further provision through redemption
to remove the consequences of that sin. Wesley,
Fletcher, Watson admit that Parentalism will not by
itself bear the strain which is put upon it, unaided by
the subsequent arrangement made by grace to remove
the penal and spiritual consequences of our first
parents' sin. But a thing intrinsically unjust in itself
cannot be made just by subsequent action relating
thereto. Moreover, the Arminian cannot prove that
redemption removes for all Adam's descendants all
the consequences of the Adamic sin, and hence so far
as some of Adam's descendants are concerned, the
intrinsic injustice of Parentalism remains unmodified
by subsequent provisions made by grace. Secondly,
having admitted the essential injustice of Parentalism
the Arminian inconsistently proceeds to argue its jus-
tice as shown in the analogous case of the ordinary
parental relation and its consequences upon children.
They maintain that it is at the same time unjust and
just — only one of the many striking instances of the
necessary inconsistencies of Arminianism. But the
ordinary parental relation really furnishes no sufficient
analogue. For Arminians admit that the sufferings
of the race are in some sense punishments. Death,
temporal, spiritual, liability to death eternal, are not
simply misfortunes or calamities. The Pelagianizing
deliverance of some modern Arminians that human
sufferings and corruption are in no sense penal is not
truly representative of Evangelical Arminianism.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 321

Now, if they are punishments, guilt must be somehow
present, for in God's moral government there cannot
be punishment without guilt. If the children are pun-
ished for their j^arents' sin, they are in some sense
guilty of these sins. But it is contrary to express
Scripture teachings to hold the children guilty on
account of their parents' sin, though they do suifer
on account of the evil deeds of their parents. If chil-
dren cannot be dealt with retributively on account of
their parents' sin, then Adam's descendants cannot be
dealt with retributively on account of his sin. And
the Arminian attempt to show an analogue between
the ordinary parental relation and Adam's relation to
his posterity is evinced to be vain. Adam must have
been something more than a parent, or his posterity
could not be adjudged to be guilty on the account of
his first sin and punished therefor.

Thirdly, the theory of Parentalism involves that
guilt and corruption by propagation pass from Adam
to his posterity, or the doctrine that like begets like.
This theory is incapable of proof in the moral realm,
and its justice cannot be established. It is also impos-
sible to show why on this doctrine only the conse-
quences of the first sin are visited upon the race. No
rational account of this limitation can be offered. It
is as illegitimate on this theory to fail to impute the
consequences of other sins to the posterity as to fail to
impute the consequences of other sins to Adam him-
self. Further on this theory of propagation, Adam
when regenerated, would have begotten regenerated
children, and regenerated parents today ought infalli-
bly to have today regenerated children. Fourthly,
Parentalism cannot be adjusted to the analogy so
clearly taught in the Scripture as existing between the

322 The Life Work of

first Adam and the second Adam. On this hypothesis
there is no analogy and Paul's parallel in Romans
and Corinthians instead of bravely walking on two
stout legs, hops lamely along in a hap-hazard and
inconsequential manner. Fifthly, Parentalism as
expounded by Arminians makes justification either for
Adam or his descendants impossible. Evangelical
Arminian theology makes no mention of the limitation
of the time as to probation even in the case of Adam
himself, and emphatically denies that his descendants
had in him a strict legal probation. If Adam were
$till obedient he could not claim justification on the
Arminian theory, for there has been no limitation of
time at the expiration of w^hich justification could be
given as a boon; and if he were still obedient, his
descendants could not claim justification, for the}^ have
not been offered a legal probation in him, by standing
which the reward of justification would be given. If
one wishes to see the Arminian theory of Parentalism
ground to powder between the upper and nether mill-
stone of philosophy and theology, let him read in Dr.
Girardeau's book on "Calvinism and Evangelical
Arminianism", Part I., Section III., Subsection I.,
"Objections from Divine Justice" — and he will find
one of the finest pieces of polemic theology which
modern literature affords.

(2) Realism is next to be considered, which is lia-
ble to the following objections: first, it is but an
extreme form of Parentalism and the arguments which
expose the falsity of the one, expose the falsity of the
other. Secondly, the theory is not only inconceivable,
but incredible and contradictory to the teachings of
reason. That the spiritual substance of the whole race
was created as one essence in our first parent, and then

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 323

by propagation divided and subdivided over and over
again to secure a separate substance or essence for each
individual of the race involves a partition or material
division of spiritual being which is counter to its very
nature. It is as offensive to human reason as the
Romish doctrine that the bread and wine are changed
into the body and blood of our Lord, although our
senses still perceive the bread and wine. To tell us
that the immaterial spiritual essence can be divided
into myraids of millions of particles, as it were, is not
simply to offer the reason a mystery but an essential
contradiction of the very nature of indivisible spirit-
ual substance.

Thirdly, on this theory the limitation of the imputa-
tion of guilt to the first sin would be impossible, for
Adam's other sins were just as truly committed by all
those who were psychically and substantially one with
him. The guilt of all subsequent parents in all their
sins would accumulate upon their descendants who
were just as truly numerically identical with them as
they were with the first parent. Fourthly, this theory
would make the human nature of our Lord actually
sinful, for if his human soul was a part of the one sub-
stance or essence which sinned in Adam, both the con-
sequent guilt and corruption which followed must have
attached itself to him as truly as to any other descend-
ants who were no more involved in this sin than was
he. There is no possible escape from the fact that
Eealism necessitates the conclusion that the human
nature of our Lord was both guilty and corrupt prior
to its assumption into personal union with his divine
nature, and the question is an insoluble one how that
guilt and corruption could have been removed so as
to make his human nature sinless after the incarna-

324 The Life Work of

tion. Fifthly, the analog;^^ between Adam and Christ
is destroyed as effectually as on the theory of Parent-
alism. Numerically one with Adam the attempt has
been made to show that we are numerically one with
our Lord, which involves, of course, the hypothesis
that the human nature which our Lord assumed
was the whole human race, and the hypothesis
destroys itself by its necessary and suicidal inconsis-
tencies. If, however, the realist hold that we are
numerically one with Adam and representatively one
with Christ, he makes Paul so lame and inconsequent-
ial a talker that the whole Christian world must be
convicted of a colossal blunder in believing for two
thousand years that the great Apostle to the Gentiles
was a mighty thinker and master theologian.

(3) Federalism or the explanation of consistent
Calvinism now remains. First, it is universally
admitted that God entered into a covenant with Adam
which included his posterity so that they are involved
in his first sin, and if Parentalism in its ordinary form,
or in the form of Eealism cannot consistently with jus-
tice account for the judicial condemnation and suffer-
ings of the race, the only conceivable hypothesis is that
of strict legal representation. Secondly, the analogy
between Christ and Adam shows our first parent must
have been the legal representative of his seed. This is
the biblical and theological key to the department of
anthropology and Dr. Girardeau gives it great
emphasis. Thirdly, the appeal to the general judg-
ment of men favors the representative instead of the
parental relation as existing between Adam and his
posterity. We do not judge a child to be guilty of a
parent's acts, but if one legally represents another, we
hold the man responsible and blameworthy for his

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 325

representative's acts. This may seem to disparage the
parental relation, but it still makes the parent to
propagate the race with its essential and inseparable
qualities, and as the parental head of the race no one
so fitted as Adam to be the federal head and represen-
tative of his posterity. All the emphasis wisely possi
ble may be placed on the closeness of the parental rela-
tion as furnishing the ground on which the federal
relation was built.

Fourthly, the key-question here relates to the justice
of the federal constitution. If God established this
relation, then it must be just on the principle
announced in the interrogatory. "Shall not the judge
of all the earth do right?" Further, it is easy to evince
the benevolence of this constitution, in that it limits
the time of probation to a definite and terminable
period, limits the persons on probation to one amply
competent for his stupendous task, and jDerhaps limits
also the area of temptation in the case of the repre-
sentative to one precise command. But the represen-
tative principle could not be thus benevolent unless it
were also just. In addition, if it be said that repre-
sentation is incompatible with justice because it allows
the represented parties no voice in deciding that the
representative principle shall be employed in their
case, the answer is obvious that on such a ground as
this the subjects of the divine government share with
God in the administration of His government. They
must elect Him, approve His policies, endorse His
administration, or else His government is impeached
of injustice. But God is an absolute sovereign, and
furnishes the best of all governments as controlled by
infinite love and justice, employing infinite wisdom
and power. Moreover, it is impossible to prove that

326 The Life Work of

the federal constitution is intrinsically unjust. If it
be asserted to be contrary to a fundamental intuition
of justice, let the exact nature of the intuition or faith
be shown, and the respects in which it is offended
clearly proven. It is certainly supposable that God
saw it equally fair to collect all mankind into unity
upon a federal head who had a glorious and easy
opportunity to acquire confirmed holiness and life for
all as to allow each man to stand upon his own foot
with the hazard of all falling and then with the repre-
sentative principle excluded no redemption possible
for any. If it be further objected that federal repre-
sentation is unjust in that it gives the constituents no
suffrage in choosing their federal head, then the same
reply obtains that on this ground the subjects become
co-administrators and co-sovereigns in the divine gov-
ernment. Moreover. God is better qualified to choose
a competent and qualified Federal Head than would
the whole race be, if they could be summoned in a
vast mass-meeting for this purpose. Besides, the Fed-
eral Head chosen was the one best fitted for this great
position, appointed when in the maturity of his splen-
did powers, amply able to stand and win the glorious
prize of justification for himself and his posterity, the
parental head as no one else could be of the race, and
feeling as no one else could the pressure of the awful
responsibilities which rested upon him. As a conclu-
sive and crushing reply to the charge that representa-
tion involving the imputation of another's guilt is
intrinsically unjust, the answer must be made that
one clear case of the employment of this principle
is a sufficient reply. Now Christ furnishes us that clear
case. He suffered even unto death and only three sup-
positions are possible. First, that he suffered without

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 327

the imputation of any guilt, which would impeach
the divine government; second, that he suffered
because of the imputation of his own guilt, which
amounts to blasphemy; or third, he suffered because
of the imputation of another's guilt, which is the prin-
ciple in hand. There are several important distinc-
tions which must be recognized in construing this doc-
trine: For example, the distinction between the impu-
tation of one's own conscious and subjective guilt and
the imputation of another's conscious and subjective
guilt. The failure to appreciate the force of this dis-
tinction accounts for much irrelevant argumentation
against the representative principle and the doctrine
of substitution. There is a further distinction between
the consent of one to be a representative of his con-
stituents and the consent of constituents to be repre-
sented by the Federal Head. The two cases are not
analogous, and because the first and second Adams
consented to act as representatives cannot be argued
as involving that their constituents must consent to be
thus represented. The distinction between the deriva-
tion of responsibility upwards from constituents to
their Federal Head and downwards from the Federal
Head to his constituents must not be overlooked as
throwing the two cases entirely out of analogy. Nor
must we forget the difference between the eternal Son
of God and the finite subjects of the divine govern-
ment, because he was under no obligation to law, he
voluntarily consented to be the sponsor and represen-
tative of his people, but that furnishes no ground
upon which to argue that his people must consent that
he shall be their representative.

Fifthly, if the principle of representation be
excluded on the alleged ground of injustice, then in

328 The Life Work of

no case can it be admitted; and the salvation of a race
of lost sinners becomes an impossibility. It is evident
that no transgressor of the divine law can deliver him-
self from its penalty, and it is equally evident that no
one disabled even unto death by the con-upting influ-
ences of sin can recover himself from their deadly
power. But representation involving substitution is
inadmissible, and the sinner must lie down forever
with his doom. It may be said that representation
issuing in the imputation of guilt is different from
representation issuing in the imputation of righteous-
ness. But the objector forgets that the first Adam
was perfectly holy, easily able to stand and win the
promised confirmation in holiness for himself and his
posterity ; and had this been the result no voice would
have been raised in protest, but how does difference in
result alter the nature of the principle involved? It
might be said that had the representative principle
been ruled out and each individual stood upon his own
foot, more would have secured the reward of justi-
fication than are saved through Christ. But the pre-
cedent of the fallen angels is against this hypothesis.
Adam's case discounts it. If with all his maturity and
holiness and tremendous responsibilities he fell, the
chance of each individual as in turn he was born into
the world would seem to have been less hopeful of
standing until confirmed in holiness, especially when
the evil example and influence of the first parent is
remembered. And when any and perhaps all fell, their
case would be forever hopeless, for representation
involving substitution and imputation are the corner-
stones of the structure of redemption, and all the wide
wonders and transcendent glories of the religion of
grace, of the theology of the Gospel, are extinguished

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 329

in midnight darkness, if this great central principle
both of the theology of natural religion and of the
Gospel of God's grace, viz., Federal representation, is
neglected and denied.

IV. In Christology, Dr. Girardeau's construction of
the doctrine of the person of Christ is one of his most
striking and original contributions to theological
science.

Christ's personality is divine both prior to and sub-
sequent to the incarnation. There is no divine human
person as the result of his assumption of human nature
into union Avith the divine nature. There is the one
unchangeable divine person; and just as the divine
nature undergoes no change so the divine personality
neither suffers change. There is no human person-
ality attached to the human nature which enters into
this union. There is the creation of a new nature,
viz.: the human nature of Christ; there is the con-
stitution of a new relation, viz. : that between the per-
son of Christ and his human nature ; there is the insti-
tution of a new medium of manifestation, viz. : the
human nature which affords a human ground for the
expression of Christ's divine personality. There are
three constituents in this union, the human nature, the
divine nature and the divine person, which is the
bond of union between the other two. The human
nature in Christ is without human personality and
expresses itself through the divine personality with
which it is united through the incarnation. Of course,
the divine nature and the divine person are eternally
and inseparably united. As a consequence of this
hypostatic or personal union of the two natures, there
results two distinct but related consciousnesses and
two distinct but related wills, and there is also a com-

330 The Life Work of

munion of the attributes of the two natures in the per-
son of Christ, but no communication of the attributes
of the one nature to the other. The orthodox doctrine
requires the assumption that human nature may be
entire without human personality. Some personality
is required in order to its completeness, but not in
every case human personality. Christ's human nature
is not absolutely impersonal, but it has subsistence in
his divine person.

The key question, therefore, in Christology is, What
is personality? The answer is that our conviction of
personality is native. It springs from a fundamental
faith or law of belief elicited into expression upon the
conditions of experience. As an original principle it
is incapable of resolution or definition, but it may be
described both negatively and positively. Negatively,
it must exclude all the elements common to man and
the lower animals, the bodily appetites and sensations,
whatever intelligence, feeling and will the animals
have in common with man, and consciousness also, for
the brutes are undoubtedly conscious. It must exclude
all the attributes which Christ has in common with
men, for the Scriptures teach us that he possesses the
entire human essence without personality. Individ-
uality, intelligence, feelings, will, moral qualities, with
the consciousness of their operation belong to the
essence of human nature and are, therefore, excluded.
They may furnish the basis which personality i-equires
for its existence and its action, but they are not the
elements which constitute personality. Personality
must exclude also any element which does not belong
to man in every stage of his history. The freedom
of the will in the sense of the self-determination of the
will, therefore, must also be ruled out. For while at

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 331

creation to fit him for probation, man was possessed of
this perilous power and in its exercise originated the
sinful spontaneity or disposition which now enslaves
him, he has not now the power to the contrary to
originate a new and holy spontaneity or disposition.
He may appropriate his already determined evil spon-
taneity in the way of elective concurrence, but the
power of self-determination in the sense of choosing
holy inclinations of soul has been lost, and, there-
fore, self-determination cannot be made as claimed by
many philosophers and theologians, an essential ele-
ment in the description of personality. It must exclude
any element which cannot be affirmed of the person
of the Son of God, or more widely of any of the per-
sons of the trinity. Personality in the Godhead is the
archetype of which personality in human nature is
the ectype, for while there is no analogue between
God as infinite and man as finite, between the incom-
municable or modal attributes of God and man's
natural endowments, yet there is in other respects a
fundamental likeness between God and man and the
communicable or determinative divine attributes are
shadowed in the reason and moral nature of man.
Moral responsibility, therefore, in the strict sense can-
not belong to personality, because it does not attach
to the divine persons. It belongs to the essence of
human nature and not to human personality as such.
Personality is accompanied by responsibility in man.
but not in God, somewhat as self-determination belongs
to man in one of his estates, but not in another.

Positively personality may be described as suppos-
ing an individual being, what in theology is called a
substance, marked by intelligence, feelings, will, moral
qualities and the consciousness of their operations.

332 The Life Work of

These are not the constituents, but they are the condi-
tions of the energy of personality. They are spontane-
ous in their activities and in this respect we have one
of the fundamental diiferences between the activities
of the essence and the activities of the person. Next,
specifically personality involves the conviction which
an individual being has of its identity. A lower ani-
mal cannot have this conviction of self-identity and
hence we do not hold them responsible for actions
committed long previously. But a man at sixty is
conscious that he is the identical individual being that
he was at twenty and hence at sixty he is held res2:)on-
sible for the sins committed at twenty. Sameness of
individual being belongs to man and the lower animals,
but they do not know it and he does, hence this knowl-
edge belongs to him not as an individual being sim-
ply, but as a person. Another peculiar element in
personality is the power of reflective activity by which
the spontaneous activities of the essence are deliber-
ately appropriated as the basis of deliberate action.
All the constituents of the essence are spontaneously
active, but reflection belongs to the person and not to
the essence. It is this power of reflective activity in
addition to the conviction of personal identity which
makes the personality of man an image of the person-
ality of God. To quote Dr. Girardeau's own statement
exactly, "Personality is the knowledge of its identity
possessed by an individual being and its reflective
activity upon the spontaneous conditions of intelli-
gence, feelings, will and moral qualities furnished by
its essence."

No philosophic theologian has advanced further into
the heart of this standing problem of philosophy and
theology than has the great Columbia professor in his

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 333

discussions upon this theme in explication of this doc-
trine and the use which he makes of his view of per-
sonality is evident without further comment or exposi-
tion.

V. In Soteriology, the doctrine of adoption receives
from Dr. Girardeau a fuller and richer development
than at the hands of any preceding theologian.

At creation, Adam was both God's servant and God's
son. A careful exegesis of Scripture gives this result.
This sonship was threefold, first, natural, in that
Adam was a spiritual being, possessed of reason, con-
science, emotions and will. Secondly, it was spiritual,
in that at creation man was perfectly righteous and
holy with spiritual life permeating every faculty of
his being. Thirdly, it was legal, in that he had certain
rights as a member of God's family, contingently it
was true and liable to be lost by sin, but these rights
were his as long as obedience continued. Now, Adam's
sin lost him both his spiritual and legal sonship, bat
his natural sonship remained. He could not be other
than God's son in this sense, and this sonship will
endure unchanged forever whatever the effect sin may
have on man's other relationships to God.

It is argued that Adam could not have been both a
servant and a son at one and the same time, because
a servant is the subject of God's retributive moral
government and a son is under disciplinary or fatherly
rule and these two as incompatible cannot co-exist.
The answer is that upon the testimony of Scripture,
our Lord was both a servant and a son, and, therefore,
it is historically proven that the two are not neces-
sarily contradictory. In addition, believers are both
servants and sons. Further, one may be at one same
time under retributive and disciplinary government.

334 The Life Work of

Such again was the case with our Lord. He redeemed
us from the curse of the Law by being made a curse for
us and through sufferings he was made perfect as the
captain of our salvation: bearing the retributions of
the law and at the same experiencing not the correc-
tive, but perfective processes of fatherly discipline.
These considerations prove that there is nothing
inherently contradictory in the position that Adam
was both servant and son under retributive disciplin-
ary government. His case as innocent was different
from that of the sinner considered as unredeemed and
unregenerate or considered as redeemed and regener-
ate. As unredeemed the sinner is no sense under
fatherly discipline, but solely under retributive moral
government. As redeemed the saved sinner is in no
sense under retributive moral government, for all its
penalties have been exhausted for him by his sub-
stitute, but he is solely under disciplinary fatherly
rule both as corrective and perfective. Adam both as
servant and son was under retributive moral govern-
ment, for had he obeyed as a servant he would have
secured the reward of justification, and had he obeyed
as a son he would have secured on the same principle
of distributive justice the reward of confirmation in
the Father's family. And as a son he was also under
fatherly rule with a view to perfective growth through
filial obedience. There is nothing contradictory in
his sustaining this dual relation to moral government
in its two species of retributive and disciplinary gov-
ernment. Moreover, that Adam was a son is shown by
the fact that re-creation or regeneration restores the
lost spiritual sonship. Those who are born not of
blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of
man, but of God are given the right to legally become

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 335

the sons of God, because they are already by the
rebirth made the spiritual children of God. If it be
objected that on this view our Lord as a substitute for
his people must obey both as a servant and as a son in
their behalf, the reply is that exactly this is the teach-
ings of the Scripture and sound theology must adjust
its system to embrace this truth. As a servant his
obedience imputed on the condition of faith secured
the justification of the believer; as a son his obedience
imputed on the condition of faith secures the adoption
of the believer.

As to its nature adoption is not to be confounded
with regeneration, for while regeneration conditions
faith, adoption is conditional upon faith. Regenera-
tion is a creative act by which we are really and spirit-
ually made the children of God, adoption is a legal act
by which we are authorized to take our places in God's
family, by which we are formally transferred from
the devil's family into God's f arniily. Regeneration
adapts us to our place in God's family, adoption author-
itatively and legally introduces us into it. Regenera-
tion -makes -us -God's -children, -adoption recognizes
and treats us as God's children. Adoption is also to be
distinguished from justification in that they termi-
nate on different relations; justification is directed
towards the subject or servant, adoption is directed
toward the child. Justification secures confirmation in
God's rectoral regard, adoption secures confirmation in
his fatherly regard. Justification introduces the regen-
erated sinner into the society of the righteous con-
sidered as a polity, adoption introduces the regenerated
sinner into God's family. Justification secures for a
servant the rewards of moral government, adoption
convevs a title to the inheritance of an heir.

336 The Life Work of

The exact locus of adoption in the theological sys-
tem is shown in the following statement ; the water
symbolizing the subjective in character and nature
includes under it regeneration and sanctification, the
blood symbolizing the objective change in relations or
status includes under it justification or adoption. In
Dr. Girardeau's own words, "Adoption is an act of
God's free grace, whereby for the sake of Christ, he
formally translates the regenerate from the family of
Satan into his own and legally confirms them in all
the rights, immunities and privileges of his children.'^
As to its grounds adoption rests on the eternal pur-
pose of God the Father, union with the Son of God
naturally, union with the Son of God spiritually, and
union with the Son of God federally as the representa-
tive and Federal Head of his people. On this ground
God the Father imputes the righteousness of Christ
to his people, which means that he imputes Christ's
filial obedience to his people. And this is the imme-
diate ground of their adoption as distinguished from
their justification whose immediate ground is the
obedience of Christ as a subject and servant. The
Rights, the Duties, and the Evidences of Adoption
are all presented by Dr. Girardeau with a clearness
and cogency which will amply repay careful study, and
the minister who desires to be himself fed with the
"finest of the wheat" in order that in turn he may be
prepared to "feed the flock of God" can do no better
than to linger long and lovingly over the treatment
of adoption in the volume of "Theological Discus-
sions."

Such are some of the key-positions in Dr. Girar-
deau's theological system and they are offered simply
as specimens or illustrations, and perhaps many others

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 337

would have been equally pertinent and illustrative.
He touched no theological topic which he did not both
adorn and discuss with signal power. And while the
writer is alone responsible for the exposition, yet so
deeply scored, in his memory are many of the formulae
in which his theological teacher stated his views that
in some cases those formulae would come unsolicited
in the very form in which they were received. But
the memory of his students will cease sooner or later
in this world to report the record of his teachings and
upon his books must finally and permanently depend
his fame and influence. And the conviction is a cer-
tain one that the world of scholarship and the kingdom
of God will "not willingly let die" the contributions
which he has made to philosophy and theology in his
"Philosophical Discussions," his "Theological Discus-
sions, Calvinism and Evangelical Arminianism" and
"The Will in its Theological Relations." One is some-
times tempted to regret that like his great contempo-
rary. Dr. Dabney, he had not completed in articulate
shape his system and given it in symmetrical and fin-
ished form to the Church. Had he done so his imme-
diate influence and renown would have been the
greater, but his permanent work and fame will be the
larger, because he chose instead of publishing a com-
pleted system to publish these profound discussions to
which he devoted his ripe powers and in which in some
cases, certainly in the specifications given in this arti-
cle, he has penetrated farther into the heart of some of
the great mysteries and doctrines of our faith than
any of his predecessors had done. These discussions
which would scarcely have fitted into a text-book
designed for class-room use, will be the study of choice
and able spirits, and he is destined to be a theologian

338 The Life Work of

for theologians, the magister inagisterum. And in the
long run he elected wisely when he gave himself to the
production of these penetrating and profound
researches into selected doctrines, which will enable
him to render this larger and more influential service
to the Church.

The type of theology which he represents is one
which will always be needed: intensely philosophic
and intensely aggressive at one and the same time. In
the vast sweep of the ages that system which is most
rational will be most commanding and influential and
the theologian can do no higher service than first to
extract by sound exegesis the contents of the Scrip-
ture, and then to demonstrate, wherever it can be done,
the reasonableness of the Scriptural teachings in the
sense of the harmony between Scripture and reason,
and when this can not be done to demonstrate at least
that the Scriptural teaching does not contradict the
deliverances of the rational power. Whatever popular
opinion may say today or tomorrow or upon any pass-
ing human day, the reason is the deepest thing in man,
and he does the business of a theologian best who sets
the Scripture and reason in right relations with each
other. No theologian of our day has wrought more
successfully at this task than Dr. Girardeau, and his
reward, though deferred for a season, is sure. Com-
bined with this as a necessary corollary was the aggres-
siveness of his theological type, which could not keep
the peace with opi30sing systems because of their
unscriptural and irrational character. A Calvinism
which smiles indiscriminately upon all its historical
opponents has lost its vitality and is in danger of
burial. Dr. Girardeau was professor of Didactic

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 339

and Polemic Theology, and he must be both in order
to be either. While having the largest charity for all
of God's people, he did not construe this to be a rea-
son for failing in loyalty to God's truth or for failing
to expose false doctrine in any of its forms. He saw
no reason to apologize for the faith in which the most
of God's people have lived and died and knew no other
policy than to expound, defend and propagate it — all
in the most stalwart, manly. Christian way of course.
An aggressive Calvinism, buttressed by Scripture and
supported by reason will win the day ; and this is the
type which our theologian represented. May he have
an ever increasing host of successors !

The splendid service which he rendered as teacher
and author, adds lustre to the Columbia Theological
Seminary, of which he was a professor for nearly a
score of years, and upon the list of its honored sons
whether as student or professor his name stands first.
The theology of Thornwell and Girardeau must always
be the type for which this institution stands. Its his-
tory demands it. Its constituency are pledged to it.
The loyal sons of their alma mater would consent to
nothing else. After all is said and done, the Chair of
Systematic Theology is the king professorship and
determines the type of theology for which the insti-
tution stands. Thornwell, Girardeau, and their suc-
cessors have wisely shaped the spirit and decided well
the type of which this Seminary is the exponent.
And an appreciative Church appraises at its true value
the service which they have rendered, and counts with
calm confidence upon its continuance for the coming
days. The Southern Church can never forget the serv-
ices rendered by that splendid line of professors, both

340 The Life Work of

of the past and the present, who have enriched the his-
tory of this noble institution and who have enriched
also the life of the Church which they served, and at
the head of this list stands the name of
JOHN L. GIRAKDEAU.

CHAPTER XI

EXAMPLES OF POEMS AND OTHER
WRITINGS

By George A. Blackburn, D. D.

In early youth Dr. Girardeau showed that he had
been gifted above his fellows with the power of expres-
sion. His meditation entitled, "The Old Church," only
a fragment of which remains, was written when he
was nineteen years of age. Here is seen the budding
scholar, philosopher, orator, and Christian. His medi-
tation, "Sabbath Morning," was written a year later,
and brings out more strongly the poetic imagination
that gave such a peculiar charm to his speeches and
sermons. These, with some other samples of his writ-
ings, will be inserted in this chapter. His hymns and
translations of Psalms are especially worthy of being
preserved. Some of them ought to find their way into
our Hymnals.

"THE OLD CHURCH."

"It was evening, the shadows of night were fast gathering
like a mantle around, when I took my way alone to the country
church. To a stranger, when approaching it, there would be
very little either striking or interesting except the ordinary
solemn influence which hangs over the last remains of those
who were once flushed with the bouyancy of life. But to me
the spot was peculiarly interesting. Around it cluster a thou-
sand recollections which, while memory retains its seat, can
never be effaced.

"To any one of even ordinary sensibility, the last resting
place of the dead is a solemn spot. The affecting contrast
which it presents to active life; the somber, still, repose,
broken only by the chirp of the cricket or the hoot of the dis-

342 The Life Work of

tant owl; the soft breeze sighing in querrulous tones through
the tall tree tops, hymning a requiem to the departed ; the long
grass waving over the narrow beds of the motionless tenants — ■
these all conspire to draw the soul away from the din and
bustle, the carking cares and corroding anxieties of this mortal
life, and lead it to the, contemplation of scenes beyond the
reach of time. There is nothing here to interrupt our fanta-
sies ; no jar of the busy throngs as they press recklessly on in
the pursuit of an unreal happiness to which they must at some
future time bid a long farewell, no noise of city commotion, no
tramp of crowds, nothing, nothing, to break the silence of the
grave — all is perfect quiet. The voice of conscience and of
God fall in thrilling tones upon the heart; the stormy clamor
of passion is hushed, and we are prepared for the reception of
all-important truth.

"Let us imagine an old philosopher of times unblessed by the
light of Christianity, but still an ardent enquirer after truth,
realizing the imperfection of human nature, and feeling keenly
the want of some better religious system than the world had
yet afforded him, despairing of any light to guide him through
the mazes of life and to shine upon the thick darkness which
hovered fearfully above the tomb, touchingly crying out, 'causa
causarum, miserere meH' Let us, I say, picture to ourselves
such a man, sitting among the graves of those whom he had
loved, and forming vague, wild, uncertain conjectures as to the
state which is now present to their conscious spirits, and which
will soon be present to his own, lost in a labyrinth of shapeless
hypotheses, and standing on the verge of despair. A voice from
heaven falls upon his startled ear, and in tones which carry con-
viction reveals to him a future state of rewards and punish-
ments, the imperishable nature of the soul, and its immortal
destiny beyond the grave, and then the method of securing eter-
nal life and happiness. Who can conjecture his feelings? What
astonishment and what rapture ! The gloom of despair, now dis-
sipated forever, he leaps for joy in the glorious anticipation of
life and immortality. A new sun has arisen, another creation of
light has taken place, and the immortal soul once shrounded in
mist and darkness is now illuminated by that sun. How precious
would such truth be to that man ! With what miser care would
he guard the treasure, and pass it onward in the path of life !
Such truth does the Bible contain. And yet, alas ! we trifle on

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 343

the brink of the tomb, and laugh when the interests of eternity
are urged upon our consideration. Oh ! what a fearful account
will too many have to give of misspent opportunities and
derided privileges. The same light which would now guide us
on our journey to the tomb and lead us in the path to heaven
will, when that journey is over and the heavenly path is no
longer open to us, expose our guilty souls at the awful tribunal
of our God and Judge. I have wandered from my original
subject, but these reflections are such as naturally press them-
selves on the mind when musing in a grave-filled churchyard.
"But to return. The dusk of evening was fast setting in,
and one by one the pale lamps were lighted in the far-off sky,
I opened the door of the old church, and walking softly up the
aisle, took my seat in the pew where my father and mother
used to sit, under the 'droppings of the sanctuary,' and worship
the God of their fathers. All was still as death. The dim
light of the fast-expiring day glowed faintly through the old-
fashioned windows. The pulpit where the men of God, some
of them now gone to their rewards, used to declare the counsel
of their Maker was but feebly visible in the thickening
shadows. How many affecting and deeply solemn recollections
crowded upon me in that moment ! I was sitting where my
mother used to sit, and all the hallowed remembrances which
always attend the thought of her stole softly and sweetly over
me in that holy place. ..."

"SABBATH MORNING."
"Preferring walking to riding on this beautiful morning, I
took my way leisurely to the church. It was the holy season
of communion. The table of the Lord was spread and I went
with softened and devout feelings to sit there and think of a
dying Savior's love. Everything around tallied with this state
of my feelings. No gloomy cloud obscured the calm, sweet,
face of the far blue sky; no boisterous wind reminded me of
stormy passions which often agitate the human heart — all was
still and peaceful. It was indeed a Sahhath. Nature seemed
to wear the same smile of loveliness that she must have worn
when fresh from the hands of her great creator. I always call
to mind old Herbert's sweet lines on such a day.

" 'Sweet day, so pure, so calm, so bright.
The bridal of the earth and sky.'

344 The Life Work of

Aud the thought would intrude that even this beautiful day-
must eypire. Could we not detain it? Were it not impious, we
could almost wish for a Joshua's power to stay the sun in his
course that we might enjoy a little longer the beauty of the
charm. However, there is not one lovely object but has its
hour of death. This morning which seems too sweet soon to
pass away must be succeeded by the dusl^y shades of night.

" 'Sweet dews will weep thy fall tonight,
For thou must die."

We might exclaim in the cold language of the day. Well, let it
go, tomorrow's sun may bring one just as bright. But we can
not. We can not let thee depart without one sigh for thy
early death. The dews will weep for thee, the stars will be
funeral tapers to burn over thy grave, the sable garment of
night will be thy pall and the mourning weeds that Nature
will wear for thee, the love whistle of the finch, and the chirp
of the solitary cricket will be thy dirge. And I, sweet day, will
sit and mourn that thou hast taken thy flight forever. Many
an equally bright and lovely day may bless our sight in future
times; many a fragrant flower will scent the gale; and many
a happy bird will 'sing the morn as merrilie,' but the same
soft feeling, the same high and holy thoughts which hallow
thee may never more visit my breast.

"As I pushed my way along the pleasant path, I listened to
the birds as they sang their morning hymns to their creator,
and I joined in with my voice and heart. I saw the sweet
jessamines lifting their heads as they perfumed the gentle
breeze. But my attention was caught by a wild violet that
scarcely dared lift up its modest head above the bosom of its
mother earth. I stooped down to admire it and thought how
much prettier and sweeter this lowly flower was than the
gaudy, though really handsome jessamine that reared itself on
high as if disdaining the station of its humbler companion.
And thus it is ever with the people of the world. The love of
display seems to be almost inherent in man. 'Some flaunt in
rags (if they can get nothing else) and some in rich brocade.'
Like the jessamine, those who are gifted by the benignant hand
of God with natural graces and external beauties, instead of
being grateful, and of humbly adoring the hand which can
take away as well as give, are proud and vain, and make use

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 345

of any circumstance which can exalt them in the eyes of their
fellow men. Like the jessamine, they cling to foreign supports
which, when swept away, leave them 'poor indeed.' In what
graceful wreath and pendent festoons that vine hangs from
the tree which sustains it; but when the ruthless axe is laid
at the root of the tree lowly, how fallen it lies ! But let us,
while we do not underrate the gifts of God, not repose in exter-
nal beauty, look within and cultivate those powers which will
serve us in the hour of need.

"But there are some, who, though endowed with many
exquisite graces, keep in mind the frailty of these graces and
are humble and retiring. Such as these are flowers — lovely
flowers that bloom in this cold world and seem too tender to
flourish long on this side the tomb. They find here an uncon-
genial soil, and, like the violet, clinging near to earth, are
trampled heedlessly by the rough and rude. These are the
victims upon whom soonest falls the sickle of the Angel of
Death.

" 'There is a reaper whose name is Death
And with his sickle keen
He reaps the bearded grain at a breath

And the flowers that grow between.
"Shall I have naught that is fair?" saith he;
"Have naught but the bearded grain?
Though the breath of these flowers is sweet to me
I will give them all back again." ' "

POEMS.
"MOONLIGHT ON THE SEA."*

'How softly streams yon fair moonlight

Upon the dark blue sea !
Like angel spirits pure and bright

It dances in its glee.
Far, far it stretches o'er the stream.

Till vision melts away.
It seemeth like a rapt'rous dream

Of immortality.

*Written while at college.

346 The Life Work of

"How merry, merry are its beams

Like fairy elves at play ;
How every gleaming wavelet teems

With virgin purity!
Like fairy elves they seem to sport

With Ocean's hoary crest,
And e'en old Ocean loves to count

Their laughter and their jest.

"Then dance away, thou sweet moonlight,

I love thy smiling face
That puts to flight the gloom of night

And fills my soul with peace.
Yes, I can sit and revel here.

And converse hold with thee ;
For thou art to my spirit dear.

Thou Moonlight on the Sea !

"Thy smile can make a sea of strife

A softer aspect take;
But o'er my sad and troubled life

A sweeter smile doth break.
Ah, Moonlight, thou mayest on the sea

With peerless brightness shine;
The smile of Jesus give to me

And I'll not covet thine."

"SPRING."

'Tis Spring, and Nature's form is seen

Attired in robes of fairest hue ;
Her mantle green, how bright its sheen.

And gemmed with drops of pearly dew,
Her voice of love — her voice of love.

How soft it streams from every hill!
How sweet the note that seems to float

From every murmuring, weeping rill !
There's not a flower in rosy bower

That lifts its modest, blushing head.
And steals a kiss of dewy bliss

From Morning's lip of glowing red —

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 347

There's not a lovely saffron tint

That paints the couch of dying Day —
There's not a star that beams afar,

And lights retiring Eve away —
There's not a tone by Seraphs blown

To which the ear of Fancy listens —
There's not a bead of early dew

That on the fragrant myrtle glistens —
There's not a breeze that through the trees

Low sighs the requiem of day —
But worship brings, and praises sings

To Nature's God in Nature's way.
Her voice of love is heard above

Though mortal sense despise her tongue,
Her Maker's ear bows down to hear

Her matin and her vesper song.
Though mortal eye may not descry

The native charms of her sweet face;
Her Maker's eye is ever nigh.

To note each beauty and each grace."

"SONS OF THE SOUTH, ARISE ! ARISE !"*

'Sons of the men who fought and bled,
By Greene, and Lee and Sumter led,
Or followed fast through swamp and glade,
The star of Marion's flashing blade, —
Now let them live again in you,
Now prove your glorious lineage true,
Light up afresh the undying fires
Of revolutionary sires.

'Hear ye the tramp of Northmen's feet?
New England heels your highways beat;
And shall their columns' spurning tread
Profane the ashes of your dead? —
Enough to make the patriot's bone
Turn 'neath the cold sepulchral stone!
Enough to rouse his mould'ring form
Once more to breast the battle's storm !

♦This, and the following two poems, are inserted to show the intense
feeling of the South at what it regarded a ruthless and unwarranted
invasion.

348 The Life AVork of

"The voices from your common Past
Shall stir you like a trumpet's blast ;
The mighty pulse of one great soul
Shall beat your thrilling battle-roll.
Shoulder to shoulder, hand to hand,
For freedom's rights together stand;
Or, wrapped in one infolding pall.
In the last pass of freedom fall.

"Behold your country bo\ys her head,
And weeps her gallant, martyred dead ;
But you she bids, with kindling eye.
'My sons avenge, or with them die!'
Religion at her altars kneels.
Meek childhood to your strength appeals,
And Innocence and Virtue claim
Your arm to shield from deepest shame.

"Sons of the South, arise ! arise I
For all that men are wont to prize
Of freedom, honor, country, State,
Is staked upon the fierce debate.
Strike now ! the historic hour is come
That stamps your glory or your doom;
Strike home ! resolved ye ne'er will see
The funeral rites of liberty.

"By the bright, sunny land ye love.
By the green fields your children rove,
By the domestic altars where
Your wives and sisters bend in prayer.
By the sweet name of liberty.
The quenchless instincts of the free,
Go down you may to freemen's graves,
Ye'll never, never live as slaves !

"Southrons, the right is on your side.
The truth shall stem this stormy tide.
The living God shall be your tower
And fortress in this trying hour.
Trust Him, and through the clouds of war
Shall glitter freedom's morning star ;
Trust Him, and His great name shall be
The oriflame of victory."

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 349

"hymn for the war."

"O Lord of Hosts, to Thee we kneel,
To Thee amidst this strife appeal ;
Forgive our sins against Thy laws.
Against our foes defend our cause.

"God of our fathers, let Thy might
Uphold the truth, support the right ;
Be Thou our leader. Thou our shield,
On each ensanguined battle-field.

"O Thou most mighty, gird Thy sword
Upon Thy thigh and give the word.
Now let the flaming pillar guide
Our armies through the battle's tide.

"Inspire our heroes for the fight.
Spirit of justice, truth and right,
Then when the invading hosts shall flee,
A country's thanks shall rise to Thee.

"And when each storm of strife is o'er.
The sabre's clash, the cannon's roar,
Where'er the patriot down shall lie
Upon his gory bed to die —

"Lord Jesus! Saviour of mankind.
Thy mercy let the sufferer find ;
Receive the suppliant's latest sigh,
And close the soldier's dying eye."

"LINES ON THE DEATH OF MAJOR MATHEW V. BANCROFT."

"This lamented young officer, the major of the Twenty-third
Regiment of South Carolina Volunteers, received a fatal wound
in the trenches near Petersburg while preparing the regiment
to receive an expected assault. In his note book, found in his
pocket, were inscribed the following words : 'Tell my dear
parents that I fell at the post of duty, while fighting for my
noble country,' He died June 22, 1864."

"At Freedom's shrine he calmly took his stand.
To lay himself a willing offering down ;
Nor thrust he back the sacrificial hand
That wreathed upon his brow the martyr's crown.

350 The Life Work of

" 'Here, at the post of danger, I'll perform
My duty at my Country's sacred call ;
Although when next shall rage the battle's storm,
My prescient spirit warns me I shall fall.'

"Prophetic words ! 'Be ready, men,' he said,

'To meet the shock of yonder gathering foe!'
Unblenched he stood,— when o'er the rampart sped
The bolt that laid the youthful hero low.

"The noble heart is stilled, that erewhile gushed
With every high emotion of the brave ;
The clarion voice, that cheered to arms, is hushed
In the deep stillness of a soldier's grave.

"Bancroft, farewell ! Forgive the starting tear.
For thou art gone, our circle's fairest gem ;
But thou, with lustrous light, shalt glitter e'er
A jewel in thy Country's diadem."

"LINES FOR MISS M. S.'S ALBUM."
'Nothing to pay?' No, nothing, to win
Salvation by merit from law and from sin ;
But all things, to buy, without money and price.
The wine and the milk of a free Paradise.

'Nothing to do?' No, not to procure

A heaven, by infinite blood made secure ;

But all things, with labour and sweat of the face,

To honor my Saviour and magnify grace.

'What of the law?' Its thunders were stilled
Against my poor soul, by the blood that was spilled :
But the hands which were nailed to the wood of the Tree
Now wield its commands to be honored by me.

'Nothing of guilt?' No, not to my God,

As Judge and Condemner, uplifting His rod;

But, ah, I am guilty of breaking His Word

In the house of my Father — the Church of my Lord.

'What am I waiting for?' Spare me a while
To tell of Thy love to a sinner so vile !
Then take me to Heaven, which is not my due.
And give me the Crown of Fidelity, too !"

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 351

"the flower of hope."

"When Eve, our first mother, forlorn,
Was banished the garden of God,
She plucked at the root of a thorn
A flower be-sprinkled with blood.

"And we, the sad children of Eve,

May find the same blood-tinctured rose;
The emblem of Hope when we grieve,
Midst thorny aflaictions it blows.

•'It blooms in the chamber of woe.

Where widows are drooping the head.
And little ones timidly go
A tip-toe to gaze on the dead.

"It grows where the stormy winds rave
In this valley of sin and of gloom ;
It springs from the mould of the grave.
And twines round the gates of the tomb.

"Dear Fanny, 'tis faith in the Cross

Which causes this flower divine
To bloom in the sepulchre's moss;
Its promise of glory be thine !"

'LINES OCCASIONED BY THE DEATH OP HARRIET ENGLISH
PINCKNEY, A SINGULARLY SWEET AND PROMISING CHILD."

"I saw a Paradise,
To which the saints arise,

Where is no night:
There stiller waters flow,
There greener pastures grow,
There sweeter blossoms blow.

That know no blight.

"I saw no darkened room,
No black-robed mourners come ;

Pure is that air :
None hold the aching head,
None press the sufferer's bed,
No dying couch is spread :

Death reigns not there.

352 The Life Work of

"I saw no little biers,
On which pale mothers' tears

Ran raining down :
No father sore distressed
Saw I, with heaving breast.
Lay his sweet child to rest.
Beneath the ground.

"I saw an infant band
Led by the Shepherd's hand.

And loving eye :
They look into His face.
And softly hymn His praise,
Through all the happy days,

And never die.

"O, why these tears we weep.
Because our children sleep

On Jesus' breast?
A little while, and we
An end of cares shall see.
And then lie down, and be

With them at rest.

"But hark ! a voice of love !
It speaks : 'On things above

Now set your heart:
Then to yon Paradise.
Ye shall one day arise.
And see them, with your eyes.
No more to part.'

"We hear the voice Divine;
Our lambs we now resign.

Saviour, to Thee:
We still the throbbing heart,
And wipe the tears that start,
There, there we shall not part,
Eternally."

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 353

"LIFE."

'Life ! 'Tis a passing breath,

A vapor of today,
Appearing for a little while.

And vanishing away.

'Life ! 'Tis a courier swift

With tidings from the fray ;
With bending form and foaming steed

He posteth on his way.

'Life ! 'Tis the eagle's flight

Across the trackless way ;
His rapid pinion beats the air —

He hasteth to the prey.

'Life ! 'Tis the gallant ship,

With pennon floating free;
The favouring gale swells all her sails,

Look now ! She's far at sea.

'Life ! 'Tis a fleeting dream

That ends a troubled night;
But start not — Lo ! the morning beam

Of everlasting light.

'Life! 'Tis the setting sun

That sinks in storms away;
But see! the morrow is begun

Of Heaven's eternal day."

"DEATH.

'The brightest eye must dim in death,
The loveliest cheek grow marble pale

The warmest heart must chill beneath
The lowly wild-flowers of the vale.

"The proudest head must bow.
The tallest form must stoop.
And in the grave so still and low
The sweetest blossom droop.

354 The Life Work of

"The brightest sun must set at night,
The fairest day expire in shade,
And nipping frosts will ever blight
The bloom o'er nature's bosom laid.

"My life, e'en now it wears
Death's livery on its sky;
My hopes, how soon they'll set in tears!
How soon in ruin lie!

"Ye earthly visions, fare ye well !
Farewell, ye dreams of fairy light !
I can not thus consent to dwell
Away from God in endless night.

"While earthly flowers are fading fast

And earthly hopes are withering too, —
JESUS, on Thee my soul I cast,
Illusive scenes, adieu ! adieu !"

"IT IS I."
"Take courage, wanderer, when the cloud of night

Lowers o'er the way ;
Though stormy winds may whistle loud
Through tattered sail and mast and shroud,
Go on. 'Twill soon be day !

"Li^t, wanderer : O'er the roaring deep.
Comes there a cheering cry.
It stills the angry wave to sleep —
'Tis Jesus tells thee not to weep :
'Take courage, it is I.' "

'THE LAST HOPE OF THE CHURCH AND THE WORLD.

"Thou who from Olive's brow didst rise
In splendid triumph to the skies,
Before the rapt disciples' eyes.

Lord Jesus, quickly come!
For Thy appearance all things pray,
All Nature sighs at Thy delay.
Thy people cry, — no longer stay.

Lord Jesus, quickly come!

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 355

"Hear Thou the whole creation's groan,
The burdened creatures' plaintive moan,
The cry of deserts wild and lone,

Lord Jesus, quickly come!
See signals of distress unfurled
By States on stormy billows hurled.
Thou Pole-star of a shipwrecked world.

Lord Jesus, quickly come!

"Hush the rude blast of war's alarms.
The tocsin's tale, the clash of arms.
Incarnate Love, exert Thy charms,

Lord Jesus, quickly come!
Walk once again upon the face
Of this sad earth's tempestuous seas,
And still the waves, O Prince of Peace;

Lord Jesus, quickly come!

"Lo, Thy fair Bride, with garments torn.
Of her celestial radiance shorn.
Upturns her face with watching worn.

Lord Jesus, quickly come!

Her trickling tears, her piteous cries,

Her struggles, fears, and agonies,

Appeal to Thy deep sympathies, —

Lord Jesus, quickly come!

"By doubts and sorrows inly pressed,
By foes beleaguered and oppressed,
Hear the strong plea of her unrest —

Lord Jesus, quickly come!
Hope of the Sacramental Host,
Their joy, their glory and their boast.
Without Thine advent all is lost,

Lord Jesus, quickly come!

"Flush the dark firmament afar,
And let Thy flaming sign appear;
Shine forth, O lustrous Morning Star,

Lord Jesus, quickly come !
Break through the lowering clouds of night.
Put these sepulchral shades to flight.
Flash out, O Resurrection Light,
Lord Jesus, quickly come !

356 The Life Work of

"And when the astonished heavens shall flee,
When powers of earth and hell to Thee
Shall bend the reverential knee,

In that great Day of Doom ;
Be ours the happy lot to stand
Among the white-robed, ransomed band.
And hear Thee say, with outstretched hand.

Ye blessed children, come !"

"BABE OF BETHLEHEM."

'Blessed Babe of Bethlehem,

Owner of earth's diadem.

Claim, and wear the radiant gem.

'Scatter darkness with Thy light,
End the sorrows of our night,
Speak the word, and all is bright.

'Spoil the spoiler of the earth,
Bring creation's second birth,
Promised day of song and mirth.

'Tis thine Israel's voice that calls.
Build again thy Salem's walls,
Dwell within her holy halls.

"Tis Thy Church's voice that cries.
Rend these long unrendered skies.
Bridegroom of the Church, arise.

'Take to Thee Thy power and reign.

Purify this earth again ;

Cleanse it from each curse and stain.

'Sun of peace, no longer stay,
Let the shadows flee away,
And the long night end in day.

'We adore Thee as our King,
And to Thee our song we sing ;
Our best offering to Thee bring.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 357

"Lamb of God, Thy lowly name,
King of kings, we Thee proclaim ;
Heaven and earth shall hear its fame.

"Bearer of our sins' sad load,
Wi elder of the iron rod,
Judah's Lion, Lamb of God !

"Mighty King of righteousness,
King of glory, king of peace,
Never shall thy kingdom cease !

"Thee, earth's heir and Lord, we own ;
Raise again its fallen throne,
Take its everlasting crown,"

"O PRAISE HIM EVERMORE !"

'Come, sinners, praise the bleeding Lamb

He all your sorrows bore ;
Come, sing a hymn to Jesus' name,

O praise Him evermore!

'He wept. He bled. He died in shame.

Salvation to procure;
All glory give to Jesus' name,

O praise Him evermore!

'He lifts you from a bed of flame

To glory's open door ;
Ye find your Heaven in Jesus' name,

O praise Him evermore!

'Ye dying souls, ye blind and lame.

Ye broken-hearted poor,
Life, light and rest is Jesus' name,

O praise Him evermore!

'Come, ransomed sinners, shout His fame,

Tell all His glories o'er;
Eternal thanks to Jesus' name,

O praise Him evermore !"

358 The Life Work of

"the song of moses and the lamb."
"Thousands of thousands round the throne

Shall sing the heav'nly psalm —
The new, the everlasting song
Of Moses and the Lamb.

"Kindreds and people, tribes and tongues.

Shall, with united heart.
Cry,— 'Holy, Holy, Holy, Thou
Lord God Almighty art !'

"Great are Thy works and marvelous
O Thou Almighty Lord !
How just and true are all Thy ways,
Thou King of saints adored !

"Who shall not fear Thee, righteous Lord,
And glorify Thy name?
Thou only holy art ; and all
Shall celebrate Thy fame.

"Worthy the Lamb, for He was slain,

And to the Lord our God
From every nation, tribe, and tongue
Redeemed us by His blood !

"Blessing and honour, strength and power.
Thanksgiving, glory, praise.
To God and to the Lamb be giv'u
Throng everlasting days !"

"PREPARE TO MEET THY GOD."

"Prepare to meet thy God !
Attend the warning knell ;
Forsake the broad and beaten road
That leads thee down to hell.

"Prepare to meet thy God !

The judgment thunders roll ;
And storms of wrath fly all abroad
To whelm thy guilty soul.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 359

"Prepare to meet thy God !

While yet in Christ there's room ;
Now, siuner, let thy heart forebode
The day of final doom.

"Prepare to meet thy God !
To Jesus come today;
Haste to the fount of Jesus' blood,
And wash thy sins away.

"Prepare me, O my God,
To end my mortal race.
To pass into my last abode.
To stand before Thy face!"

"THE SPIRITUAL CONFLICT."

*Thy law, O God, is pure.

But mine's a captive's fate;
For what I would, that do I not,

And do the thing I hate.

'I know that in my flesh

There dwelleth no thing good ;

The will I have; but find not how
To do the good I would.

'I find a law that when

I'd serve Thee, sin's at hand ;
Yet in Thy law, O God, I joy
Within my inward man.

'Another law I see

That wars again my mind,
And leads me captive to the law
That makes my members sin.

"A wretched man I am I

Who shall deliver me?
Who from the body of this death
Shall set my spirit free?

"I thank Thee, O my God,

Through Jesus Christ, my Lord ;
Through Him, I surely trust, Thou wilt
Deliverance afford."

The Life Work of

"first psalm."

'Blest is the man who walketh not

In counsels of deceit,
Nor in the way of sinners stands.

Nor fills the scorner's seat.

'But ever in Jehovah's law

He placeth his delight ;
And in his law he meditates,

Alike by day and night.

'In season he'll bear fruit like trees
By running streams that stand ;

His leaf ne'er fades ; and all he doth
Shall prosper in his hand.

'Not so the wicked : they're like chaff

The wind doth drive away ;
They shall not in the judgment stand,

Nor with the righteous stay.
'Jehovah doth approve the way

Of those that righteous be ;
The way of the ungodly man

Sftall perish utterly."

"TWENTY-SEVENTH PSALM."

"When Thou didst say. Seek ye My face.
My heart replied to Thee,
Thy face, Jehovah, will I seek ;
Hide not Thy face from me.

"O hear me, Lord, when with my voice
I unto Thee do cry ;
Have mercy also upon me
And unto me reply.

"When father, mother, me forsake
The Lord will interpose;
Teach me Thy way. O Lord, and lead
Me straight through all my foes.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 361

"Unto the wishes of my foes

Do not deliver me.
False witnesses against me rise
And breathe out cruelty.

"My soul had fainted, unless I

Had fully been assured
That in the land of life I'd see
The goodness of the Lord.

'Wait patiently upon the Lord,

And of good courage be;
He'll furnish strength unto thine heart —

Wait on the Lord, I say."

"EIGHTY-FOURTH PSALM."
"How lovely are thy dwellings, Lord,
My soul doth long to see
Thy courts : my heart and flesh do cry,

O living God, for Thee.
The sparrow lingers near Thy courts.

The swallow there hath found
A nest beside thine altars. Lord,
Where she may lay her young.

"How blest are they that in Thy house

A dwelling-place have found;
And who when earthly comforts fail

Thy praises still shall sound.
Blest is the man whose strength's in Thee;

Whose heart is on the ways
Of them who pass through Baca's vale,

And fill the vale with praise.

"From strength to strength they go ; till each

In Zion shall appear :
Hear Thou my prayer, O Lord of Plosts,

O Jacob's God give ear.
O God, our shield, behold tlie face

Of Thine anointed King;
For in Thy courts, one day exceeds

A thousand days of sin.

362 The Life Work of

"I'd rather keep Thy door, my God,

Than with the wicked live;
Jehovah is a sun and shield.

He'll grace and glory give.
For no good thing will He withhold

From those that upright be ;
O Lord of Hosts, how blest the man

Who puts his trust in Thee."

"NINETY-FIRST PSALM."

'He who doth in the secret place

Of the Most High reside.
Beneath the shadow of the Lord

Almighty shall abide.
Of God the Lord, I'll say. He is

My refuge and defence;
He is my God; and I in Him

Will place my confidence.

'He surely will deliver thee

From out the fowler's snare;
And from the noisome pestilence

He'll save thee by His care.
His feathers shall thy covering be.

Beneath His wings thou'l't flee;
His faithfulness forever shall

Thy shield and buckler be.

"Thou Shalt not fear the night's alarms.

Nor dart by day that's thrown.
Disease that in the darkness walks

Nor death that wastes at noon.
A thousand at thy side shall fall.

Ten thousand e'en shall lie
At thy right hand; but unto Thee

It never shall come nigh.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 363

"Only with thine own eyes shalt thou

Upon them look and see
The righteous retribution of

The men that wicked be.
Because thou's't made my refuge, God,

E'en the Most High thy home,
No ill shall take thee, never plague

Shall nigh thy dwelling come.

"He'll give thee in His angel's charge.

To keep in all thy ways,
And lest thou dash thy foot on stones,

Their hands shall thee upraise.
Upon the lion thou shalt tread.

And on the adder's seat.
The dragon and the lion's young

Thou'l't trample under feet.

"Because He sets his love on me,

I will deliver him ;
I will establish him on high,

Because he knows my name.
Upon me he shall call, and I

Will surely answer him ;
With him in trouble I will be,

I'll save and honour him."

•ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY-FOURTH PSALM.

"Behold, bless ye Jehovah, all
Ye servants of the Lord,
Who stand by night within His house,
By night attend His word.

"Lift up your hands in holiness
Your praise to Him address;
The Lord that made both heav'n and earth
Thee out of Zion bless."

364 The Life Work of

"one hundred and fiftieth psalm."

"Praise ye the Lord. Sing praise to God,
Within Plis holy place ;
And in his firmament of power,
Unto Him render praise.

"O praise Him for His mighty acts ;
His glorious greatness praise ;
Praise Him with sound of trumpet blast;
With harp and psaltery praise.

"Praise Him with timbrel and with pipe;
With tuneful strings Him praise ;
With organs, and on cymbals loud —
On clashing cymbals praise.

"Let every creature that hath breath
To utter forth His praise,
Jehovah's glory celebrate;
Praise ye Jehovah; praise."

Dr. Girardeau's published books are, "Instrumental
Music in the Public Worship of the Church," pub-
lished in 1888; "Calvinism and Evangelical Armin-
ianism,'^ published in 1890: "The Will in Its Theo-
logical Eelations,'' published in 1891 ; "Discussions of
Philosophical Questions," published in 1900; "Discus-
sions of Theological Questions," published in 1905;
and "Sermons on Important Subjects," published in
1907.

His book on "Instrumental Music in the Public
Worship of the Church" is really a testimony" against
what he regarded as a corruption of the worship of
God. The book rests on the principle that a divine
warrant is necessary for everything in the faith and
practice of the Church, and the argument is a splendid
piece of logical reasoning. If any one supposes that
this was a mere vagar}^ of his, let him remember that

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 365

this was the view of John Calvin, Zwingle, Gillespie,
Kiitherford, Owen, Thornwell, Breckenridge, Dabney,
Charles Spurgeon, and a countless number of other
illustrious men of all ages of the Church. It was also
held by the Huguenot, the Scotch, the Irish, the Inde-
pendent, and other reformed churches. If any one
thinks it easy to answer this book let him put his argu-
ment in syllogistic form and he will find that he has
subverted some of the important principles of Presby-
terianism, or that he has a non sequitur.

The book on "The Will in Its Theological Relations"
is his master-piece. This book will live because it
illuminates a problem that will always live — Free
Agency and Divine Sovereignty. It places one hand
on the throat of Arminianism and the other on the
throat of necessitarianism and says to them, "You are
equally wrong — the truth lies between you." It has
probably given the final answer of the human intellect
to the questions, "How can sin exist and God be a
Sovereign?" And, "How could a holy being become a
sinner?"

In his "Discussions of Philosophical and Theolog-
ical Questions" his analysis of Herbert Spencer's
Philosophy, his treatment of the Inspiration and
Authority of the Scriptures, and his discussion of the
doctrine of adoption will probably be regarded as his
best chapters.

Some of his best writings are found in pamphlets,
reviews, and Church papers. These would make a
small volume themselves. His articles in the Southern
Presbyterian Review on the Diaconate ought especially
to be emphasized.

CHAPTER XII

THE MAN
By George A. Blackburn, D. D.

Dr. Girardeau was a remarkable man in every
respect. His figure was tall, straight, well-propor-
tioned and athletic; his movements were easy and
graceful; his face was strong, and his blue eyes could
beam with love or flash with fire as occasion required ;
his A^oice was full, rich and sweet; it was said that
when preaching in the early days of his ministry, it
sounded like the notes of a flute; it certainly had
wonderful compass; he could make it imitate the lap-
ping of the water on the beach, the roll of distant
thunder, or anything else for which his high-wrought
and splendid rhetoric called; his gestures, always
made unconsciously, were strong and impressive and
exactly suited to impress the thought that he wished to
convey.

In home life, he was a model. He gave his wife the
love of his heart, and treated her with that considera-
tion that constituted the first element of chivalry in
the old-time Southern gentleman. His French blood
strongly manifested itself in his treatment of his
children, he delighted to pet and play with them, and
his method of dealing with them drew out and culti-
vated their emotional natures. They loved him pas-
sionately, and they also reverenced him, for with them
his word was law.

As a friend, he filled all the ideals of the highest
standards. He gave his friends his love, trust, and

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 367

loyalty, expecting the same from them, and when any
of them disappointed him the wound was deep. He
probably never refused a request from a friend if it
were in his power to grant it; he certainly never
refused money to any of them, nor would he ever take
interest from them. When with them there was no
restraint in his manner; he delighted to joke them, and
could take jokes from them, being always full of life
and humor. His appreciations of friendly attentions,
and his enjoyment of friendly associations were great.
He and Dr. R. L. Dabney did not agree on every point
in theology*, nevertheless they were warm personal
friends. They had been chaplains together in the Con-
federate army, they were recognized as the two leading
theological teachers of the Southern Presbyterian
Church, and in most of their public controversies they
were in harmony. When, therefore. Dr. Dabney, him-
self afflicted with blindness, heard of the partial
paralysis of his friend, he came to Columbia to visit
him. Their communion was sw^eet, and in a measure
the spirit of other days seemed to come back on them.

*Dr. Girardeau left among his papers one entitled : "Points Upon
Which I Disagree With Dr. Dabney" : "Distribution of Theology from
Source, Dabney's Theology, p. 6. Space and duration, p. 10. Possi-
bility of an infinite series of finite parts, p. 19. Identification of
Adoption with Justification, p. 627. Opposition to Immediate Impu-
tation, p. 341. Doctrine as to the Will (as inadequate), p. 120. Rela-
tion of Repentance to Faith as to order of production, p. 656. The
nature of the Divine Foreknowledge, p. 158. Our knowledge of the
Infinite, p. 173. Adam's sin made certain by God's decree, p. 214.
View as to the standing of the elect angels, p. 231. Arraignment of
sub-lapsarianism, p. 233. Analysis of Reprobation, Denying two Ele-
ments, p. 239. Construction of the Wesleyan doctrine of Imputation,
p. 316. View of Traducianism (leaning to it at least), p. 319. Advo-
cacy of the private nature of the first sin, p. 311. Appetite dependent
for awakening upon perception, p. 115. Inadequate analysis of
responsibility for mental beliefs (will included), p. 423. Self-determin-
ation— what, p. 287. Witness of the Spirit, p. 711. Two natures in
the believer denied, p. 677."

368 The Life Work of

On Sunday, Dr. Dabney preached to a large congrega-
tion, in the Arsenal Hill Church, on the power of love.
The sermon was one of extraordinary power, and when
he came in his discourse to the love of Jesus for his
aged servants many in the congregation were weeping.
Dr. Girardeau himself Avas deeply moved, while the
hearty congregational singing, unaccompanied by any
instrument of music, seemed to greatly affect Dr. Dab-
ney. When the service was over the two came down
the aisle together; they were men of imposing pres-
ence, each like the son of a king; their faces showed
the influence of chastening grace; their foreheads
betokened the might of the intellects behind them;
venerable men ! dignity, goodness, and greatness sat
with ease and naturalness upon them. Dr. Girardeau
said : "Doctor, that was a glorious sermon this morn-
ing." Dr. Dabney replied, "This has been a sweet
service to me, and this singing carries me back to old
Tinkling Spring." Dr. Girardeau said: "But what
will it be in heaven?" The answer of Dr. Dabney was
lost in the tramping of the congregation. And so,
blind and lame these princes in Israel walked on,
talking of the past and future worship of God. A
few months after this meeting they both joined the
general assembly and church of the first born in the
majestic worship of their God and Saviour.

He was an unusual student ; he loved his books, and
would ordinarily work into the small hours of the
morning; sometimes, as he went up to bed, he would
meet Mrs. Girardeau coming down to begin the duties
of the day. He made notes on the margins, and
indexed what he wanted to remember on the fly leaves
of his books; these notes show what good use he made
of his library of more than three thousand volumes.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 369

His scholarship was accurate and extensive, he read
Hebrew, Greek, Latin and French with ease, nor was
he unacquainted with the natural sciences. He
delighted to think through questions, to reach the
foundation principles that governed them, and get
their bearings on other related subjects. This quality
was one of the things that made him pre-eminent as a
teacher for it enabled him to present whatever subject
he discussed as a whole so that every part of it, like
some great building, could be seen at a glance.
" The Church at large has acknowledged him as one
of her greatest preachers; he was not only great
sometimes, he was always great. Congregations fre-
quently lost the sense of time and place under the spell
of his eloquence; often whole congregations would
be weeping under the vividness of his emotional pic-
tures. On one occasion a man was sitting near an old-
time window, the sash of which was raised, but being
slightly jammed, was not fastened. The preacher was
setting forth the awe-inspiring events of the final
judgment; just as he described the blowing of the
arch-angel's trumpet, the window sash dropped with a
loud "bam!", the listener, terrified, as if he had heard
the peal of doom, leaped into the air, and over those
between him and the aisle, nor did he stop until he
was clear of the house. On another occasion, when
he had among his hearers one of the ablest and most
dignified ministers of the Southern Church, he
described the swine into which the devils had entered
going over the steep place into the sea. As he imitated
the curl of the tail on the back of the hogs with his
finger his friend and admirer broke into a loud laugh,
then rememberinof where he was, he hushed with a
snap of his teeth. His preaching produced a won-

370 ■ The Life Work of

derful effect upon the negroes. He required them to
suppress all extravagant outbursts; but sometimes a
groan, a sob, a sigh or a soft laugh would pass like a
wave over the whole congregation. The white people
enjoyed his preaching quite as much as the negroes,
while old soldiers say that they can still remember the
sermons he preached to them while they were gathered
round the camp fires of Virginia. It was said that
there were only two men at the great prison on Fort
Johnston who could instantly command the attention
of all of the Confederate prisoners — the commandant
and Chaplain Girardeau. The author of this chapter
will never forget the first sermon he heard him preach.
It was from the text. "The soul that sinneth, it shall
die." As he listened, he realized that the apparently
extravagant reports of his preaching had not done
him justice; the sermon was profound, philosophical,
learned, beautiful, eloquent and powerful, and left
its permanent impression on the hearer, who wondered
then, and has been wondering ever since, what it was
that made his preaching so different from that of
others.

In an effort to find the source of his power some
things are clear. His Maker had endowed him with
splendid gifts, and Grace had added to them rare
virtues. His figure, voice, eyes, gestures and graceful
bearing were suited to the orator; his great intellect,
working at white heat; his intense emotions, stirred
into flame; his vivid imagination making his pictures
real; his calm judgment, exquisite taste and wonderful
magnetism must all be taken into consideration: so,
too, the careful preparation of what he had to say,
his chaste language, his touching illustrations, and his
love and sympathy for men all had their effect, but

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 371

these are not sufficient to account for his strange power.
Moses talked with God face to face and saw the hinder
parts of his glory ; John, the Baptist, dwelt in the wil-
derness alone — with God ; Paul saw Jesus on his medi-
atorial throne, entered the highest heaven and heard
things that could not be repeated, and from these cir-
cumstances we understand their power. Where else
should we look for the power of this man? He spent
much time over the open pages of the words of truth,
he was often on his knees in midnight vigils, and some-
times the whole night was spent in unbroken prayer, —
God heard him and dwelt with him, thus he became "a
man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost," and one
who spoke out of the deep experiences of a heart that
felt the love of God shed abroad in it.

In theology, he was a Sub-lapsarian ; in morals, a
Puritan ; and in government a Presbyterian. To him,
every word of the Bible was the infallible word of the
living God. Every thing that concerned the faith and
practice of the Church was determined by this word
of God as interpreted in the light of his regulative
principle: "A divine warrant is necessary for every
thing in the faith and practice of the Church." This
rule governed him in all of his thinking and in all of
his conduct.

His views on prophecy are especially interesting at
this time. He believed that we were in the last part
of the "Times of the Gentiles" ; that the Gentile period
would end in a great apostacy; that this would end
by the coming of the Lord in a Spiritual or material
way, he was not sure which ; that before this the Gos-
pel would be preached to all nations as a witness, and
the Jews would return to their own land.

372 The Life Work of

Dr. W. S. Pliimer Bryan of Chicago, a student of
Dr. Girardeau, has preserved in his notes a paper that
gives exactly his teaching on the second coming of
Christ. The notes, with the paper, are as follows :

"ESCHATOLOGY.

"Papers by Dr. Girardeau. Second Advent. Premillenialism
and Post-MiUenialism.
"The appeal must be to the direct testimony of Scripture and
not to any antecedent speculations of our own. What saith
the liord? The consideration of the analogy of Scripture, how-
ever, is necessary. We are not at liberty to interpret Scrip-
ture against Scripture. In cases in which particular passages
seem to be opposed to each other, we must consult the pro-
portion of faith. The question must be considered. How far
are we to interpret prophecy spiritually and figuratively ; how
far literally. Difficult question. Prophecy is sometimes pos-
sessed of dogmatic force. For example, the dogmatic state-
ments of Scripture in regard to great events still future — the
Resurrection, the Judgment, etc., are prophecies by their very
nature ; at least partially so. The doctrine of the first Advent
during the first Dispensation was equally a dogma and a
prophecy. The time of its occurrence was doubtful, but not
the event itself. It is not clear, then, that the Second Advent
is at all doubtful as an event, or as to the circumstances that
shall environ it, while the time of its occurrence may be pur-
posely clothed in obscurity. A distinction is conceivable,
further, between the precise time of its occurrence and its rela-
tion in time to other events. In the latter aspect, it may be
fairly discussed, while there can be no legitimate discussion
as to the former, since no revealed data are furnished on
which to ground discussion and consequently no conclusions
can be reached. Of that day and hour knoweth no one but the
Father. It is among the contents of revelation. The precise
time of arrival of the descending Saviour will be unknown on
either the Premillenial, or the Post-millenial hypothesis. There
are differences as to details among both the parties to this
controversy. Neither class as a class is free from inconsis-
tencies of views. Unless, then, it can be proved that the incon-
sistencies of one class make their system logically self-destruc-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 373

tive, while that is not true of the other, the appeal of this
want of harmony by either party is captious and irrelevant.
The peculiar nature of the subject makes it necessary that
one should guard himself against the danger of making it a
hobby. What! The relative importance of the Priestly and
Kingly functions of Christ. The former constitute the great
theme of the preacher — Christ crucified. If we are to magnify
any one department of revealed truth, above others, let it be
that which is concerned about atonement, the way of Life to
perishing sinner. But surely the Kingly office of Christ is also
to be treated as important. Wisdom in dealing with these
subjects according to the analogy of Scripture. Danger of
overlooking Death and Heaven in their relation to the indi-
vidual in treating of the Millennium and the Second Personal
Advent in their relation to the Church as a whole, and to the
world. The Preacher immediately in contact with individuals
— primarily. Consult Scripture as to this matter. At the
same time the duty to hold up the Second Personal Advent as
the hope of the Church, and as the consummation of the hopes
of the individual. Tlic Millennium. There will be a definite
period (it may be a dispensation of the New Testament econ-
omy) which will be marked off from the present by peculiar
and characteristic. 1. The extension of the devil. 2. The gen-
eral effusion of the Holy Spirit. 3. The reign of Christ mani-
fested in some visible and glorious manner; and the complete
subjection of the world-powers to His rule. 4. The universal
prevalence of peace — the cessation of war. 5. The literal
restoration of the Jews to their own land. 6. The first resur-
rection (whatever it will be). 7. A paradisaical condition of
the earth, succeeding great physical changes.

374

The Life Work of

Ol

^^

!>

a>

H

xn

n

o

1

cc

>1

rH

a

o

o

biD o

a m

a

o

O

o ci 'S O „

.2 ?3 o >,-a

^ ?s- a ^

~\ K b ^ ^ -g O

^ c ^ H § S

•'S^

O 4)
o

m

2 I

V( '-4->

-a a c
--: o

-;^ a 3

:;? ..2

il o

- o

■^ ^

C "^

A a

+J o

.s ^
a .3
'2 a

'O c 5k •-^

,is»

'^%%<i2

-^ — t^

2 « ^ a th

t2 G -^ O ^

- -r o to

«M K 1^ 3

on 0
(Thi
eons
lonal
be th

Destructi
Powers,
temporan
ond Pers
may not

— ^

^3 OJ

r-i r^

So

>5 .

^

.t: >>

r ?

.5 o .

C

^^-^

'^-^ OJ

<!

r5 22 a

Q > S

l^

'S^.S

«(-l

^ O 0)

o ^ a

V-^ot

Sh ,;:_, ^

Ssa

a -M

a

JS^-S

■-M

;:q S

rH H ^

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 375

"If the question be, whether Christ will come to introduce the
Millennium I would answer, Yes, certainly, in the second of these
specific senses, as developed through the Church, nations and
polities. Destruction of the world-powers, whether in the Church
or out of it, so far as their anti-Christian elements are concerned.
If the question be, whether Christ will come in His second glori-
ous Personal Advent to introduce the Millennium, I would
answer : I do not certainly know. The likelihood is that it was
not intended that we should know. Of that day and hour
knoweth no man, no, not the angels, nor the Son of Man Himself
as the Commissioned revealer of God's will to men. It is not ai
matter of revelation. How, then, can we know? I am disposed
to think that the times of prophecy have reference mainly to the
first of the above mentioned senses of the term Coming of the
Lord and Coming of the Son of Man as applicable to polities. 1.
Upon this question, the first thing to be settled obviously is the
sense in which the terms ComA/ng of the Lord and Coming of
the Son of Man are employed in Scripture; and upon that
point I am satisfied that many Post-Millenialists (as Dr. David
Brown, for example) have conceded too must as all pre-millen-
ialists demand too much — viz., in the latter case that the terms
be rigidly limited to the Second Personal Advent. President
Edwards' view, I hold to be the true Scriptural one, as may
be established by a fair induction of particular declarations of
the New Testament. 2. The second thing to be determined is
the future fact of a Millennium marked off as a clistinct period
from preceding ones by peculiar and characteristic features.
Also how far it may be considered as constituting a New Dis-
pensation. The Mosaic Dispensation was distinct from the
Patriarchal, but was not introduced by the visible personal
advent of Christ. His first Advent in that sense was to intro-
duce the Christian dispensation. This fact deserves to be noted
and may have regulative influence in settling the question sig-
nalized under this second head. 3. If there will be a Millen-
nium in what sense Christ will come to introduce it, whether
in the first or second of the specific senses signalized above.
(1) I believe there will be a Millennium distinguished by
peculiar and characteristic elements. (What are they?) (2)
I believe also that Christ will come to introduce it. (3) That
is perfectly conceivable that His coming will be in the sec-
ondary and subordinate sense — it may be in that sense. The

376 The Life Work of

sense is Scriptural. (4) That it is extremely difficult to prove
that His coming will be in the higher sense of the Second Per-
sonal Advent. The difficulty lies in ascertaining which class
of Scripture passages preponderates — that apparently favoring,
or that apparently opposing it.

''■The Final Assault Upon the Church. The view has been sug-
gested by Dr. Breckinridge and some others, that the last
assault upon the Church, by the multitudes represented under
the names of Gog and Magog, will be made by the wicked
after their resurrection under the lead of the devil. The idea
is appalling; but it does not strike me as having sufficient
ground of probability. The Scripture is not very explicit upon
the subject, but there is one passage which seems to be adverse
to the above-mentioned view. 'The last enemy that shall be
destroyed is death.' But, according to the hypothesis men-
tioned, the wicked will take the aggressive as enemies of the
saints after the destruction of death as the last enemy of the
latter. For the saints shall be raised before the wicked. 'The
dead in Christ shall rise first.' Supposing, however, that these
words have sole reference to the order in which the resurrec-
tion of the dead saints and the transfiguration of living saints
shall occur, and that the resurrection of the righteous and the
wicked will be synchronous; still, we must admit that death
wall have then destroyed as the last enemy of the saints before
the attack upon them of the raised wicked could take place.
The last enemy to be destroyed, accordingly, would not be
death, but the devil and the massed wicked raised from the
grave. But that contradicts the express declaration that death
will be the last enemy of the saints, whose opposition it will
be necessary for Christ to subdue."

During his later days he leaned clearly to the Spirit-
ual coming of Christ to introduce the millennium.

In 1886 the Second, now the Arsenal Hill Presby-
terian Church, was organized in Columbia, S. C. Dr.
Girardeau, having felt constrained to leave his chair
in the Theological Seminary by reason of his opposi-
tion to the views of Dr. Woodrow on the subject of
Evolution, was called to the pastorate of this church.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 377

He agreed to accept the call provided the church
would accept his views on instrumental music in the
public worship of the church, would allow the deacons
to serve at the communion table with the elders, and
would not allow its members to attend theatres or take
part in dances and card parties. To these conditions
the congregation assented, and he became their pastor.
After a year changed conditions opened the way for
him to return to the Seminary, and he gave up his
pastorate of this church, which he used to say was
dearer to him than even Glebe Street had been. His
son-in-law, the Rev. Geo. A. Blackburn, succeeded him
as pastor, and arranged for him to continue preaching
in the church every Sabbath afternoon. This he con-
tinued to do until his health failed. To the end, large
congTegations of all denominations attended these
services.

Dr. Girardeau held that professors, under ordinary
conditions, ought to retire from the Seminary at
seventy years of age; so when he reached that age
he offered his resignation and insisted on its accept-
ance against the protests and intreaties of his brethren.

He retired from the Seminary in the spring of 1895.
The following fall a slight apoplexy left him partially
paralyzed on one side. Thus broken in health he con-
tinued until June the 23d, 1898, when death opened
the portals that admitted him into the kingdom of
joyful life. His end was peaceful. In the dimly
lighted room, surrounded by his weeping family, and
attended by his loving physician. Dr. Benjamin F.
Wyman, he quietly ceased to breathe and his soul with-
drew from its tabernacle of clay to abide with Jesus
until the resurrection morning. There was no rustling
of wings, nor sound of heavenl}^ music; no soft

378 The Life Work of

etherial light, nor sense of mystic visitors; yet, angelic
guards were there to guide his conscious soul, through
air and ether, by moons and suns and stars, along
the highway of the universe that had been beaten
for centuries by the swift passing heroes, martyrs,
and saints, with their spirit attendants, to the capital
of the Great King. How long would it take him to
pass through the intermediate space, and stand at the
portal of the gold-paved city of palaces, walled with
its priceless stones and lighted with its halo of glory?
What Avould be the impression on this master of
assemblies, who had described the beauties of this
"Jerusalem, the Golden" as few others had ever done,
when his vision swept its splendors and his conscious-
ness drank m its indescribable loveliness? No wonder
the tears ceased to flow in the desire to see him
approach the throne of His Majesty, the Savior he
had loved and worshipped with such passionate devo-
tion; to see them meet, face to face; the faithful ser-
vant, the matchless Master; to hear the words of wel-
come— what were they, and what did he answer?

His funeral services were conducted in the Arsenal
Hill Church by Dr. J. R. Howerton, his student and
friend, and he was buried in Elmwood Cemetery near
where the dust of his beloved teacher. James Henry
Thornwell, lies. On his tombstone is the following
inscription :

"JOHN L. GIRARDEAU

Born
Nov. 14th, 1825

Died

June 23, 1898.

After he had patiently endured,

he obtained the promise. Heb. 6 :15."

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 379

The Charleston Presbytery adopted the memorial of
him prepared by the Rev. F. L. Leeper. The Presby-
tery's minute is as follows :

"Memorial Services of the Late Eev. John L.
Girardeau.

8 o'clock P. M.
"Agreable to a special order, Presbytery met and
entered upon the memorial service of the late Rev.
John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D.

"Rev. F. L. Leeper, Chairman of the Memorial Com-
mittee, read the following paper :

" 'The Rev. John Lafayette Girardeau, D. D., was born on
James Island, in Charleston County, S. C, on November the
14th, 1825, A. D. He graduated from Charleston College in
1844, and from the Columbia Theological Seminary in 1848.
He was licensed to preach by the Charleston Presbytery in the
same year, and labored for a short time in the Wappetaw
Church. Not long after entering into the ministry he was
called to the pastorate of Wilton Church, near Adam's Run,
in Colleton County, then a wealthy and influential congrega-
tion. He was ordained to the full work of the ministry and
installed pastor of this church in 1850. In 1854, he was called
to take charge of Zion Church, in the city of Charleston. This
church had been established by pious Presbyterian masters for
the special benefit of their slaves. He continued in this work
until the breaking out of the Civil War in 1861. The Lord
largely owned and blessed his work among this people, and to
his dying day he cherished the memories of this pastorate
as among the most prized of his life. Here, Sabbath after
Sabbath, was presented the novel sight of a large church build-
ing filled with negroes, while in the surrounding galleries sat
their white masters and mistresses, all eagerly listening to the
words of life from this gifted man of God. During his pas-
torate of this church, then occurred, in 1857, the most remark-
able revival of religion known in the history of the city or State.
For weeks he gathered his congregation nightly to pray for an
outpouring of the Holy Ghost. In these services there was no

380 The Life Wokk of

preaching, but they were prayer-meetings only, and the effort
of the pastor was to have all the prayers concentrated upon
the outpourings of the Spirit as the special gift of the ascended
Lord and Mediatorial King of the Church. The congregations,
like those of prayer-meetings, usually, were not large, at the
beginning, but were composed of the earnestly pious of the
church, and steadily grew until at the close of these meetings
the house was well filled. One night, while all were buried in
prayer, there suddenly came upon all present an inexpressible
feeling of awe, hushing even the voice of prayer, and causing
a profound silence. After some seconds this silence was
broken by sobs all over the house. When this feeling had some-
what subsided, the pastor rose from his knees, announced
preaching for the next night, and dismissed the congregation,
which quietly dispersed.* The next night as the pastor
approached the church, he was surprised to find the street
filled to a considerable distance with a crowd of people, eagerly
pressing to get into the building. Working his way with difii-
culty through this crowd, he entered the church, and found
every available inch of space already occupied by a congrega-
tion of both negroes and whites. For weeks these services con-
tinued, marked throughout with wonderful manifestations of
the Spirit's presence and power. Hundreds of both races were,
during these meetings, happily converted to God, and from these
came many, who as ministers, officers and private members,
have blessed and refreshed the Church in all her borders.

" 'When in 1861 the war broke forth between the North and
South, Dr. Girardeau, an earnest and enthusiastic Southerner,
entered the army as Chaplain of the 23rd regiment, S. C. volun-
teers, and continued with them until the close of the war. His
faithfulness to duty and undaunted courage are beautifully
illustrated by an incident told by one of the members of this
regiment. "On one occasion Dr. Girardeau was conducting ser-
vices just before a battle. The men were in the trenches,
while he stood on the level ground just behind them. During
the prayer the enemy opened upon them with their artillery.
In the midst of falling shot and bursting shells, he continued
his prayer to the end, apparently as calmly as if he had been
in his church at home."

*The congregation did not disperse until after another service.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 381

" 'Returning home after the war, he became pastor of Zion
Glebe Street Church, in the city of Charleston. For years after
the war, the old Zion Colored Church was a part of the pas-
torate of Zion Glebe Street, and each Sabbath he preached once
in the white church and once in the negro church. As pastor
of Zion Glebe Street he built up a large congregation, and so
trained them in religious truth that it became a model Presby-
terian Church, noted for its high standard of piety, its zeal in
mission work, and its large liberality. For years the regular
contributions of this church for outside causes of benevolence
more than doubled what they expended upon themselves.

" 'In 1876 he was elected Professor of Theology in the Colum-
bia Seminary. This election cost him months of anxious
thought and prayer. The Seminary had been torn and rent by
internal discord, and sorely needed the help of its strongest
friends. He loved it as the institution where he had received
his own training, and as belonging to his native State, with all
the intensity of his ardent nature. The natural bent of his
mind and the labor of his life were to the study of Systematic
Theology. He had the natural gifts of a teacher and was
peculiarly fitted for the place. His election had been unani-
mous and enthusiastic. His friends were urgent in pressing
him to accept the position, as the only means of saving the
Seminary. Yet in the face of all this he hesitated for months
in agony of mind and heart. A short time before his election
a controversy occurred in the Seminary between the body of
students and the Professors. This controversy was carried to
the General Assembly for final settlement. Dr. Girardeau had
earnestly espoused the side of the Professors as representing
lawful authority. The Assembly, however, decided in favor of
the students, and several of the Professors resigned in conse-
quence of this action. One of these was Dr. John B. Adger,
who had been a close and life-long friend of Dr. Girardeau.
The question over which he prayed and agonized was. What
did honor and faithfulness to these, who in solemn protest to
what he and they believed a wrong, had resigned from honor-
able positions in this institution, demand of him? Only when
honestly holding himself at Christ's judgment seat, his con-
science became clear in its judgment that in accepting the posi-
tion he was guilty of no unfaithfulness to these, his friends,
nor of inconsistency with his own avowed principles, did he

382 The Life Work of

consent to accept. In the fall of 1876, he entered upon his
duties as a Professor. As a teacher he fully met the expecta-
tions of his friends. He was laborious and painstaking in his
preparation, and enthusiastic in his teaching. He inspired his
students in a large measure with the same elements. A law
of the Seminary fixed seventy years as an age limit, at which
all professors cease by virtue of age to be professors, and can
be continued in their chairs only by a yearly-re-election. Dr.
Girardeau was not willing to subject himself to this constantly
recurring re-election. So in 1894, as he approached the age of
seventy, he gave notice to the Board of Directors, as required
by the Constitution of the Seminary, that he would resign his
position with the close of the session in 1895.

" 'Early in the winter of 1895, he was taken sick, and from
this he never fully recovered. He lingered, physically a feeble
and broken man, until the 23d of June, 1898, when, surrounded
by his heart-broken family and friends, he gently and quietly
fell asleep in Jesus, in the full hope of a blessed entrance into
his Lord's presence, and of a glorious resurrection.

" 'Such are the brief outlines of a life of large gifts, of intense
piety, and of great usefulness.

" 'As a man. Dr. Girardeau was gifted with large and quick
mental powers. But in his judgment, these were only tools
with which to do life's work only as they were brought to
highest possible perfection, and kept in best working order.
So he was careful to train and keep disciplined his mind by
close and hard study. Years of careful training of his reason-
ing powers made him a close and logical thinker. Turning
his mind to any subject, he was able to pursue it through its
many windings and varied relations, dividing and sub-dividing
it by a close analysis, until he became master of it. In his
work he had no need of pen or paper, but so thoroughly had
he trained his mind to do its work, that fixing his eye upon a
certain spot on the floor, he could hold it steadily on one sub-
ject for hours, until he had thoroughly thought it out. He had
also a vivid and carefully trained imagination, which enabled
him to take the subject which he had torn to pieces by his
analj'sis and rebuild it into a living theme.

" 'It was the combination of these two powers that made him
the orator that he was — instructive and pleasing at one and
the same time. Behind these were the fires of an intensely

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 883

passionate nature. He inherited all the warmth, and quick,
strong passions of his Huguenot ancestors. He owed much to
grace in both curbing and chastening this passionate nature,
and himself often gladly acknowledged the debt. It was, how-
ever, exactly this passionate nature that drove him forward in
all his work with such intense and continued energy; that
made his mind work at white heat when turned to any subject
that he loved; and caused his words to come forth burning
w^ords, that set his hearers all aflame, and made him a master
of Assemblies.

" 'These gifts of nature made him to be an earnest man of
large powers that would have lifted him into leadership in
any calling of life. When converted and brought to yield him-
self to Christ, this very earnestness of nature made the con-
secration complete. As a Christian he was both earnest and
enthusiastic. His religious life gathered into itself every
power of his being and the things of eternity, in his faith,
became living forces of the present, inspiring in his heart
motives of actions and determining the form into which char-
acter was to be moulded. Under the intensity of his religious
life, he became in its highest and best sense a man of one idea,
and largely wrought into his life the motto of the Apostle, "This
one thing I do."

" 'To him, the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ was the one
thing in this world that was worth knowing. An earnest and
diligent student, often turning night into day by his long con-
tinued labors, it was the Gospel alone that engaged his energies
and absorbed his thoughts. Even when his mind was turned
to other fields of thought, it was still this one idea that con-
stantly and consciously controlled him. In the fields of science,
of philosophy and of literature, he was ever seeking for
clearer ideas, and better illustrations of the one Gospel of God;
and for the best words and forms in which to tell unto his fel-
low-men "The old, old story of Jesus and His love."

" 'Another marked element in his religious life was his deep
and earnest humility. While conscious of his gifts and powers,
and rejoicing in the possession of them as means with which
to do his Master's work and his fellows' service, he yet realized
that as spiritual forces they were the things that are not, and
had to be chosen of God and filled with His Spirit before they
could accomplish anything for God or man. Therefore, the

384 The Life Work or

glory of all real achievements in his work he recognized as
belonging to God and not to him.

" 'He had a deep and abiding sense of sin and utter emptiness
in himself. To him, Jesus Christ himself was a real, living
and personal friend, able and willing to meet all his wants.
His faith, therefore, was a personal love to Jesus himself, and
a constant effort to realize his presence and approval. This
made him to be a man of prayer. So by this daily communion
with his Lord, he was continually measuring himself, not by
any comparison with his fellows, but with his Lord, and so
there was ever present with him the feeling, "I have not already
attained, neither yet am I perfect." This deep sense of sin
and unworthiness largely moulded even his public prayers, and
made them to ring with earnest confessions of sin and tender
pleadings for mercy. Living in the presence of Christ, he
learned to know the worth of the truth, and to be eager to
get it, no matter whose the tongue that uttered it. He would
listen with profound respect to the humblest negroes, and cheer-
fully acknowledged that from them he had often learned some
of the profoundest and most important lessons of the Christian
life.

" 'He had a deep love for and a ready sympathy with his
brethren of the ministry, and was always quick to recognize
and appreciate their gifts. In a close, friendly intercourse of
twenty-eight years, unbroken by a single jar or misunder-
standing, I never heard him criticise adversely a brother
preacher or his sermon, unless the sermon contained, what he
believed to be, fundamental error, and then his criticism would
be severe as against the thing taught rather than against the
teacher. Amid the bitterest controversies, it was seldom that
he allowed himself, even among his closest friends, to give any
expression to his judgment against his opponents personally,
and when betrayed into doing so, he would repent of it bit-
terly, as under the sense of a great wrong done.

" 'His religious life was full of sunshine, making him to be
habitually cheerful. He was genial in his nature and loved
companionship. When among friends, and especially when
with his brethren, he enjoyed their society with almost a child-
hood zest.

" 'He was a positive man in his convictions, and having once
reached a conclusion of faith, it became to him a settled ques-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 385

tion from which nothing could turn him. At the same time,
he was a man of broad charity. He loved his own household
of faith intensely, yet his sympathies went forth freely to
brethren of other denominations, and he was always willing
to labor for or with these as opportunity offered.

" 'As a preacher, he was careful and painstaking. In his judg-
ment, preaching was tremendously solemn. He believed that
in every congregation, and under every sermon, men were
actually settling questions of life and deatli, and dealing with
issue of time and eternity. Preaching was, therefore, to him
serious work. He gave to it the most careful and laborious
preparation of both mind and heart. He wrote but few of
his sermons, and yet in the strict sense he was no extempo-
raneous preacher. He carefully thought out his sermons even
in minute detail, and he trained his memory to hold them, and
to reproduce in the pulpit the work of the study. A vivid
imagination gave intensity of life to his preaching, and made
even the discussion of the most abstruse doctrine intensely
interesting to his hearers.

" 'As a pastor, Dr. Girardeau was faithful and tender. He
was a hard student and loved the seclusion of his study. He
was, therefore, not given to much visiting for the mere sake
of visiting. When his people were in health and free from
trouble, he visited but little among them, believing that he was
best serving them in his study, making the more thorough
preparation for the Sabbath. But the moment sickness or sor-
row came to any of them, his whole heart was enlisted for
them, and, putting everything else aside, he gave himself
wholly to the effort to help and comfort them. In the sick
room or home of sorrow, his voice would become as tender in
its tones as that of a mother dealing with a hurt child, and
his prayers were earnest and impressive. In dealing with
men's consciences, while always tender, he was exceedingly
faithful. He had a great horror of leading a soul to rest in
false hopes, or in mere shallow experiences of grace. In receiv-
ing members into the church, while confining himself to ques-
tions of experimental religion, he still made his examination
close and thorough. In his judgment the adding of a member
to his church was a small matter; but the uniting of a soul
to Christ the greatest event in the world.

386 The Life Work of

" 'As a presbyter, he was both faithful and efficient. He was
a Presbyterian from conviction, and believed that the courts
of the Church were ordained of Christ. Attendance upon these
was, therefore, a question of obedience to his Lord, who had
made him to be a bishop in his house. Only the most serious
providence could keep him from attending upon their sessions.
And when in attendance he gave himself wholly to the busi-
ness there to be transacted. His ordinary rule was to be pres-
ent at the opening and closing services. He was a courteous,
yet an earnest debater, contending for what he believed to be
right and for the best interest of the Church, regardless of
what the consequences to himself might be. All questions
relating to the Church's welfare, in his eyes, were important.
He believed the Church to be the real kingdom of God. That
upon the actual coming of this kingdom into the real expe-
riences of this world, depended all sure hope for the righting
of all wrongs ; the breaking of all rods of oppression ; the pun-
ishing of all iniquity; and the rewarding of all righteousness.
That the coming of this kingdom to the full fruition of its
appointed glory was the only possible hope for peace and hap-
piness to this earth. He, therefore, took an intense interest
in every Church question, whether it related to some feeble
congregation in some dark corner, or to the Church at large.

" 'In all departments of his ministry he worked as one that
realized that he must give an account to his Lord. His aim
was to keep himself in constant expectation of that Lord's
coming, and to be always ready. All the years of his minis-
terial life were spent in his native State, and as a member of
Charleston Presbytery, by which he was licensed and ordained.
Into the history of this Presbytery the energies, prayers and
faith of this man of God were largely wrought. Today we
miss from our assemblings his cheerful face, his wise coun-
sels, his earnest devotion to duty, and his tender and hopeful
prayers. We stand with bowed heads and sad hearts as we
lay our tribute of love in his vacant place, and realize that
these places which once knew him so well, shall now know him
no more forever. Earnestly we pray the Lord that the mantle
of the fast departing fathers, the Dabney, the Hodge, the
Adger, and the Girardeau, may fall upon the younger sons of
the Church, and that the high ideal of a ministry maintained
by these, may ever prevail in our beloved Southern Church.

John L. Girardeau, D, D., LL. D. 387

" 'Be it resolved,

" '1. That a page of the minute book of this Presbytery be
inscribed to the memory of this beloved brother.

" '2. xiiat the earnest sympathy of this Presbytery be extended
to the bereaved widow and children of our brother, praying
for them the abounding grace of our God to help and comfort
them in all their sorrow.' "

"After hearing the Memorial, nearly every member
of Presbytery bore testimony to his esteem and regard
for the piety and ability of him to whose memory this
service was set apart.

"By a rising vote, the Memorial as prepared by the
Committee was approved and ordered to be spread
upon the records of Presbytery, and offered to the
Church papers for publication."

A few testimonials will close this chapter. The fol-
lowing is an editorial from The News and Courier of
Charleston, S. C. :

"John L. Girardeau.

"The Rev. Dr. Girardeau, who died at his home in Colum-
bia on Thursday night, was a very remarkable man. He was
a profound theologian, a powerful antagonist in debate, a
thorough teacher, an accomplished scholar, a brilliant rhetori-
cian, a marvelous preacher. His whole heart and soul were
given to his work. He was passionately in earnest in what-
ever cause he espoused, and contended for his convictions with
all the ardor of an enthusiastic nature. He made himself a
part of his subject and went with it wherever it led and what-
ever the consequences. He made a marked and lasting impres-
sion upon the religious thought of the times in which he lived.
He yielded nothing to so-called 'modern thought.' He believed
that the decrees of God are eternal and unchangeable, and he
held with undying tenacity to the Scriptures of the Old and
New Testament. He was a thorough-going Calvinist, and
though trembling at the eternal justice he trusted to the mercy
of God which endureth forever.

388 The Life Work of

"In the class room Dr. Girardeau was unexcelled as a
teacher- but it was as a preacher that he was most widely
known. In the pulpit he was irresistible as a prairie fire. He
spoke with the utmost ease, and whatever the character of his
congregation, he compelled their attention and admiration.
Whether expounding the Word to his simple-minded colored
flock in Charleston or preaching before an assembly of the
Church's most learned men, he illustrated the wisdom and
power, the height and depth and all-embracing wideness of
the Gospel of Christ.

"During the war Dr. Girardeau served as a chaplain in the
Confederate army. He believed that the South was right all
the way through, and he held his views unchanged and
unchangeable to the last. Personally, he was a most attractive
gentleman, and in his social relations he was the centre of a
charmed circle. His manners were simple and unaffected. He
regarded this life merely as a school of preparation for the
higher and everlasting life into which he has entered. A prince
in Israel has fallen here only to be exalted yonder."

A member of the old Glebe Street Church writes :

"The tidings have come of the passing away of one of the
most distinguished men that our State has produced. When
the battle-stricken warrior sheathes his sword and retires from
the fight to lie down and die his comrades, even to the lowliest
and humblest, love to tell of the battles he has won and the
record he has made.

"Will you give place to a few words of tribute to him whose
name adorns the head lines of this article from one who knew
and loved him well?

"Born upon our coast, he had that ardent, passionate love
for the 'low-country' which only a low-countryman can under-
stand. He loved first of all Charleston, then his native State.
While at the same time a Southerner of the old stamp, he
embraced in the most ardent affection the traditions and con-
victions that belonged to this Southland of ours.

"There are, doubtless, some in this city who can recall, with
admiration, an address delivered by him just after the Civil
War, when all our hearts were bleeding from the fresh wounds
which it had left. It was made before the survivors of the

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 389

Washington Light Infanty, and with the most wonderful word-
painting he drew a picture of our low-country scenery and
spoke of our love for our seaside homes. His skilful brush
reproduced before the mental vision of his audience the scenery
he himself loved so well— the almost tropical luxuriance of
the foliage, the oak embowered bays and islands, and the
river banks lined with tangled forests— the home of the turkey
and the deer.

"After long service as chaplain in Virginia, the close of the
war found him back in his old home and among his own peo-
ple, now desolated and impoverished, and he became pastor of
the Glebe Street Presbyterian Church, in connection with the
charge of a colored church in Calhoun Street.

"A^ a preacher Dr. Girardeau was 'sui generis.' His style
was his own, and what that style was those who heard him
in his prime can testify. The most abstract discussion under
the fire of his earnestness and desire to convince became
luminous. Hence he was never dull. His application and pero-
ration were often masterpieces of impassioned eloquence. All
his gifts of oratory, all the stores of learning he had treasured
up in his well disciplined mind he laid as a tribute at his Mas-
ter's feet. The pathos, the tender appeal, the solemn warn-
ing, the tone of voice, the graceful gesture, the eye, now flash-
ing with the fervor of his thought, now melting into tender-
ness— these are simply indescribable.

"Like most great men. Dr. Girardeau thought strongly and
expressed himself strongly and always had the courage of his
convictions. Hence to some minds, cast in a different mould
from his, he at times appeared 'extreme,' but those who knew
him best and understood him were aware that he could always
give reasons, and good ones, too, for the faith that was in.
him.

"But he is gone, and there is one light less in our intellectual
firmament. Our State is, indeed, rich to be able to produce
such men as Thornwell, Girardeau, Palmer. The last named,
in his green old age, still lingers in the land of Beulah. 'As
thou art .so were they ; each one resembled the children of a
King.' "

390 The Life Work of

Dr. T. A. Hoyt says, in The Christian Observer:

"There are many testimonies to Dr. Girardeau's preemi-
nence as a preacher. Men of culture, some of them diBtinh
guished preachers, who had heard Guthrie, Caudlish, Cun-
ningham, James Hamilton, French, Gumming, and Spurgeon,
have declared that Girardeau excelled them all. But he always
depreciated himself as a preacher, and for this reason, while
he met his appointments at home, it was difficult to induce
him to preach elsewhere. The world consequently never came
to know him. Among the last comments he ever made upon
himself was : 'I could preach to the negroes. That's about all
I was ever fit for.' No one who never heard him preach to
the negroes ever heard him at his best. To them he talked as
an angel from the skies. To them he preached on the pro-
foundest problems of religion, and discussed the most intri-
cate questions of Christian experience. It seemed to me that
before an audience of negroes he could make the doctrine of
the Trinity plain."

His life-long friend, Dr. B. M. Palmer, wrote:

"July 5th, 1898.

"My Dear Mrs. Girardeau : The Central Preshyterian of
June 29th confirms the report of your husband's death, which
had before reached us through a private source. It is a per-
sonal sorrow to hundreds in the Church, as well as to those of
his own household. For though the tie may not be so near
and tender, as that which bound him to yourself, the associa-
tion is both close and sweet which endeared him to many.
Perhaps even more than the students of his later years, the
associates of his earlier manhood may most deeply feel his
loss. To this class I myself belong; for we were connected
by close churchly ties, until the period of my removal to New
Orleans. The interval of more than forty years has not, how-
ever, separated us either in memory or affection. He was
indeed one of the noblest of men ; endowed with royal intellec-
tual gifts, these were equaled if not surpassed by the qualities
of his heart. Indeed, the combination of natural and moral
attributes was exceedingly rare and stamped him with an
individuality altogether his own. A physical nervous force,
like an electric current, ran along the line of his vigorous

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 391

thought as well as through his deep emotional nature, to con-
stitute him one of the greatest of our modern preachers. Bet-
ter than all, his fervent piety and deep religious experience,
gave a holy sanction to all his public teaching. It will be
long before another generation can produce his equal ; and
those, who have known him from first to last, feel that we
lay him to rest among the immortals of the past.

"What he was to you in the privacy and joy of his home,
can only be measured by yourself. Not often does the shadow
of such a bereavement fall upon any home. I do not venture
to offer the premature consolations which only vex the heart ;
for well I know that in the first access of bitter sorrow the
heart desires to be left to the luxury of its own grief. In due
time, however, the God of all consolation will whisper to you
the needed words of comfort — enough to sustain your faith
until you are called to join him in the life of blessedness
above.

"Yours in sympathy,

"B. M. Palmer."

The following anonymous poem was published in
The Southern Preshyterian of July 14, 1898 :

"On the Death of a Beloved Minister.
Affectionately dedicated to the family of Rev. J. L. Girardeau.'*

"Brother, all tny toils are ended ;

All thine earthly warfare's done ;
To thy long-sought rest ascended.

Thou hast won thy starry crown !
There the w^elcome plaudit met thee ;

Well-done Servant of thy Lord,
Faithful toiler in My vineyard.

Enter on thy full reward !

"Thou wast faithful with the talents

I committed to thy care.
And each burden laid upon thee.

Gladly for Me thou didst bear.
Now beside the 'living waters,'

In my greenest pastures rest ;
And forget thine earthly sorrows.

Leaning on My loving breast !

392 The Life Work of

"Oh ! methinks the holy angels

Never had a dearer care,
Than that ransomed soul to glory,

On their shining wings to bear !
Hark! the golden harps of Heaven,

Quiver with a richer strain.
As that voice with holy rapture

Blendeth in the glad refrain !

"While on earth. Redemption's story,

Ever dwelt upon his tongue.
And to him the 'Songs of Jesus'

Were the sweetest ever sung.
Now the loved ones led to Heaven,

By his earnest pleadings here.
Join with him to praise the Saviour,

Who redeemed and brought them there.

"But alas ! while thou art bathing

Where the streams of bliss o'erflow.
Sighs are heard, and wails of mourning

Through our Zion here below !
She hath changed her beauteous raiment

For the sable robes of grief !
Saviour, wilt thou not in mercy,

Quickly come to her relief?

"Stay thy rod, O Heavenly Father,

Spare the watchmen left her now ;
They whose hearts, though sorely smitten,

Meekly to Thy will would bow,
Let the unction of Thy Spirit,

With his 'mantle' on them fall.
May they emulate his fervor,

'Till they hear the welcome call !

"And to that now darkened dwelling

So long brightened with his love.
Holy Comforter with healing

Haste, oh haste Thee, from above.
Sweetly woo those broken spirits

To their everlasting rest;
There to find their lost and loved one

Leaning on the Saviour's breast !"

APPENDIX

INAUGURAL ADDRESS

Delivered Before the General Assembly at Savannah,
Ga., May 23, 1876, by the Rev. John L. Girar-
deau, D. D., Professor of Didactic and Polemic
Theology in the Columbia Theological Seminary.

THEOLOGY AS A SCIENCE, INVOLVING AN
INFINITE ELEMENT.

Fathers and Brethren of the Assembly: Did not
usage require that something be said touching my
induction into this chair, I would prefer to be silent
upon that subject. A few words will, I trust, suffice
for the demands of the occasion, and I shall pass on
to the discussion of a more congenial topic.

The act just performed in your presence scarcely
needs comment — it speaks for itself. Yet it is proper
that I should say it has been done without reserve. I
accept your Standards in the sense in which they were
constructed by the Old School Church in 1837 and 1838,
and in which they are notoriously understood by the
Southern Presbyterian Church. Accustomed for years
to teach those venerable documents in the pulpit, the
Sabbath School, the Bible class, and the family, it
occasions me no difficulty to bind them thus solemnly
upon the conscience. It is only to repeat what was
once done when I stood up with profound emotion
to assume my ordination vows. I have no particle of
sympathy with the infidel cant which prates of the

394 The Life Work of

tyranny of creeds and the decay of "crumbling theo-
logies.'- On the contrary, I fully subscribe to the
necessity of confessions and symbols, as a testimony
to the truth of God, and as a bond of union between
the faithful witnesses for Christ. Still I feel bound
in honesty to express the opinion, that, as there is a
possibility in the future of more and more perfectly
conforming our doctrinal standards to the word of
God as the supreme and infallible rule of faith and
practice, some wise and carefully guarded provision
to that eilect should be made in the Constitution of
our Church; and also to state, that, as such a pro-
vision exists for the amendment of our governmental
standards, one is at liberty to discuss the necessity or
expediency of changes in them, it being at the same
time understood that until they are duly made, the
practice of the Church ought to be in accordance with
the existing law.

I would avail myself of this occasion to tender to
my able and honored brethren of the Faculty of the
Seminary my grateful acknowledgments for the wel-
come to their sacred academic fellowship which they
have been pleased to extend, and to express the hope
that the fraternal intercourse with them which it has
been my privilege already to enjoy may know no
unhappy interruption. An obvious delicacy restrains
me from speaking of the present, with its living
actors; but I may be indulged in a brief allusion to
the past, and especially to those who, once connected
with this institution, have rested from their toils for
Christ's kingdom and truth upon earth, and have
taken their seats among the General Assembly on high.

I esteem it a joy that the school of sacred learning,
in which I have been called to occupy a place, is that

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 395

at whose maternal breasts I first drew my knowledge
of theology. There it was my privilege to sit at the
feet of Dr. George Howe, the erudite and accom-
plished scholar, and Dr. A. W. Leland, the sacred
orator, endowed by Providence with rich and splendid
gifts. The grand head, the classic face, the organ-like
voice, the majestic elocution, the fervent and evangeli-
cal delivery of truth, are matters of tradition now, for
he has been gathered to his fathers and sleeps in Jesus.
At the same time it was my happiness, with my fellow
students, to listen to the eloquent and powerful preach-
ing of James H. Thomwell and Benjamin M. Palmer,
whose pulpits were additional professorships of theo-
logy to the favored pupils of the Seminary. I blush
at the thought that the chair to which I have been
called, and which I have reluctantly consented to
ascend, was subsequently filled by both these distin-
guished servants of the Church — ^by one provisionally
for a brief period, and by the other for a term of years.
Yes, I blush to venture into a seat which Thornwell
illuminated by his ample learning, his profound
genius, and his exquisite tact for instruction. He
shone in the ecclesiastical firmament a brilliant star,
of the first magnitude, which blazed the more lus-
trously as all too swiftly it sunk to its setting in a
dark and frowning horizon ; and although, alas ! it
disappeared from our straining eyes, it has left behind
a trail of light which lingers a wake of glory upon
the scene of his last labors and the Church of his pas-
sionate love. Plato thanked God that he was per-
mitted to live in the age of Socrates, and no youthful
lover of theological truth who ever sat under the
teachings of Thornwell would be ashamed to confess
a kindred gratitude. But though he be dead, yet shall

396 The IjIfe Work of

he, by the grace of Providence, yet speak in the place
in which his eloquent tongue discourses no more. Had
he survived to complete the labors so auspiciously and
magnificently begun, the Calvin of our Southern Pres-
byterian Church would have produced a work which
would have been to us what the immortal Institute of
the Christian Religion was to its age, and upon which
the encomium contained in the line of Martial might
justly have been pronounced :

"Unum prce cunctus fama loquatnr opus" ;

at least the great work of the illustrious Princeton
theologian would not now, save as to the doctrine of
the Church, be without a peer as a comprehensive mod-
ern recast of theology. What he has left will, I trust,
make its mark upon the Columbia Seminary, and the
grand analyses and comprehensive principles of
revealed truth he has embodied in his writings be
infused into the minds of the students of that institu-
tion. It will be a labor of love for one who has studied
in the school of this master — and it was the school of
Christ — though he may follow with no equal pace,
nay, at a long interval behind, to endeavor up to the
bent of his ability to continue its methods and incul-
cate its doctrines.

The communications which have been presented to
the Assembly render it unnecessary for me to allude
to the great reluctance with which I entered upon the
duties of this position; but I take leave to say that,
in their susception, I acted not from choice, but in
obedience to the repeated call of my brethren. Now
that the trust is assumed, nothing remains but that I
bring to it what industry and ability the Head of the
Church has granted me. Discarding all dependence

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 397

upon fleshly wisdom, and implicitly relying upon the
unction from the Holy One, who teacheth all things,
I not unwillingly dedicate myself to the performance
of this office. Profoundly conscious of insufficiency for
these responsibilities, I am nevertheless comforted in
part by the conviction that the love of the truth, which
has never been a subordinate passion of my heart, has
not diminished with the lapse of years. I can sincerely
adopt the language in which the great scholar. Sir
William Jones, has beautifully paraphrased a noble
passage of Berkeley's Siris:

"Before thy mystic altar, Heavenly Truth,
I kneel in manhood, as I knelt in youth ;
There let me kneel till this dull form decay,
And life's last shade is brightened by thy ray !
Then shall my soul, now lost in clouds below.
Soar without bounds, without consuming glow."

When Dr. Thornwell was inaugurated into his Pro-
fessorship in the Seminary, he pronounced a discourse
in which he discussed all the great aspects of theology
—its nature, its scope, its methods, its distributive
principle, and its importance. That address is extant
in his writings ; and however appropriately to the cir-
cumstances of this occasion one might submit his own
views upon these subjects, the fact which has been
mentioned deters me from so ungraceful and superero-
gatory an effort. I shall, therefore, content myself
with inviting attention to the discussion of a more
specific question.

It is now so generally admitted that theology is a
science, that any elaborate attempt to establish its
claims to that denomination would seem to be super-

398 The Life Work of

fluous. It has been said that the title of science is
denied to theolog\^, "partly on the ground that the
habit corresponding to it is not natural, but super-
natural; and partly on the ground that it does not
spring from principles of reason, nor proceed by logi-
cal deductions. It does not, in other words, find a
place under the Aristotelic definition of science." Now,
even were it conceded that it professes to be a sub-
jective and not an objective science, the first of these
objections would not necessarily be fatal. For if there
may be a natural habit of natural knowledge, there is
no just reason why there may not be a supernatural
habit of supernatural knowledge ; and if reason, in its
natural condition, is adapted to the scientific treat-
ment of the former, one fails to see why reason super-
naturally enlightened may not be com^^etent to deal
with the latter. Theology, however, claims to be
mainly a science in the objective sense, as concerned
about the theory rather than the habit of religion, and
the difficulty alleged is consequently deprived of force.
To the other objection it may be answered that theo-
logy does in part spring from the indestructible prin-
ciples of reason, endorsed and enforced by revelation;
that in so far as it arises from the dicta of a super-
natural revelation, it does no more than other sciences
in accepting fundamental principles already fur-
nished; that if that be gi'anted, it grounds itself upon
data which are at least of no lower original than those
supplied by reason ; and that if the facts and doctrines
of a divine revelation be given so as to be apprehen-
sible, our faculties, if supernaturally illuminated, not
only may, but must, by a logical necessity, proceed to
arrange and classify them — in other words, to reduce
them to scientific form. It mav surelv be allowed to

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 399

a theologian to do reflectively what every intelligent
man of piety, to a certain extent, does spontaneously.

It is not, however, my purpose to vindicate at large
the claims of theology to be a science, but to endeavor
to meet what is, perhaps, the most formidable difficulty
lying in the way of these pretensions, growing out of
the allegation that the attempt is made to reduce the
infinite to scientific conditions — to make the unthink-
able a term of human syllogisms. It must be admitted
that, as to His essence, God is undefinable; an infinite
being, as He is in himself, cannot be subjected to logi-
cal forms, cannot be made an element in the narrow
premises of finite reasoning. We know nothing of our
own substances except through their phenomenal prop-
erties, and what can we know of the substance of God ?
But if this Avere all, as theology has for its chief object
an infinite God, it would follow that its pretensions
to be a science at all, in any proper sense, must at once
be discharged. With a profound conviction of the lit-
tleness of man and the greatness of God, and, I trust,
with the reverence which befits the discussion of such
a theme, I would adventure some reflections upon the
questions : Have we a valid knowledge of the Infinite
Being? What is the mode of attaining to that knowl-
edge? And is it possible for the reason to employ it
as an element in the processes of science? In order to
clear the way, it will be necessary to institute some
preliminary inquiries, and to fix the meaning of the
terms which will be prominently employed.

In the first place, what is the relation between faith
and reason? It has been so customary for certain
writers to speak of the distinct provinces of faith and
reason, and to represent them as occupying entirely dif-
ferent domains, and performing entirely separate

400 The Life Work of

functions, that there is no wonder that confusion has
been the result. It would seem to be obvious that there
can be no generic difference between them. Take any
view of the nature of faith, except the special one of
a feeling of trust, and it cannot be excluded from the
territory of the reason. If we adopt the distribution
of Kant, and regard the pure reason as distinct from
the logical understanding, and as constituting the seat
of transcendent ideas, it is manifest that such a fac-
ulty would be the very repository of our fundamental
faiths. It would be the precise office of the reason to
believe those truths which transcend the forms of the
logical understanding. Take the view of Hamilton,
and identify the reason with the understanding as the
same generic faculty, and it is clear that it must be
considered as the place in Avhich these primary faiths
or fundamental laws of belief are to be found. And
as faith, in all its aspects, whenever it is in exercise,
involves as its first element the assent of the under-
standing, it must be admitted that since the under-
standing and the reason are, on this hypothesis, the
same faculty, faith can only be regarded as a function
of the reason. To what other department of the mind
can we assign it? The truth would seem to be that
reason is simply a genus of which faith is one of the
species. Another is thought; and the distinction,
which is really valuable and deserves to be noted, is
not between faith and reason, but between faith and
thought. In the one case it is the reason believing,
and in the other the reason thinking. It is one and
the same faculty discharging distinct specific func-
tions. If this view be correct — and I see not how it
can be fairly disputed — a considerable advance is made

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 401

toward disentangling the difficulties connected with
the main questions before us.

In the second place, the inquiry must be met as to
the real distinction between faith and knowledge. It
is one of critical importance in regard to the possi-
bility of a knowledge of God as an infinite being. It
deserves to be signalised in consequence of differences
which, I am inclined to think, are to a certain extent
more apparent than real between the parties to the
issue in reference to the cognoscibility of God. It is
moreover deserving of consideration in view of the
fact that, as the result of inadvertence, or perhaps, in
some cases, of the desire to avoid an apparent captious-
ness and technical minuteness, the greatest writers
have not always used their terms with that rigid uni-
formity which is demanded by the importance and
difficulty of the subject. Sir William Hamilton, not-
withstanding the ordinary accuracy of his terminol-
ogy, has not always been free from vacillation in this
matter. And one at least of his distinguished critics
has, in consequence of the same fact, rendered it doubt-
ful whether his intention was to affirm or deny the
possibility of knowing the infinite simply by the func-
tions of the thinking reason. Now, it is respectfully
generic relation which I have attempted to show is
held by reason; with this important difference, how-
ever, that reason is the generic course from which
faith and thought spring as species, while knowledge,
on the other hand, is the generic result of the exercise
of these specific powers. Is it not clear that there are
some things which we know because we believe them,
and other things which we know because we think
them? And yet there appears to be a continual ten-
dency to confound the cognoscible with the cogitable.

402 The Life Work of

There are cases in which they coincide, but there are
others in which they do not — in which the know able
transcends the thinkable. There are instances in
which knowledge is the common product of faith and
the reflective reason; and there are others in which
faith attains a knowledge which lies utterly beyond
the reach of the thinking faculties alone. There is,
therefore, no generic distinction betAveen faith and
knowledge, just as there is no such distinction between
faith and reason. Knowledge is a result of which at
one time faith is a factor, and at another, thought.
Wlien, therefore, it is affirmed that we cannot know
the infinite by the thinking reason — in other words,
that we cannot conceive it — the meaning need not be
taken to be that we cannot know it at all ; but, on the
contrary, the position is consistent with the affirmation
that we know it by faith. When Hamilton sometimes
says, We do not know, we only believe the infinite, he
departs from his own strictness of speech. His mean-
ing is that we do not know it by conceiving it, but we
know it by believing. "The Divinity," he correctly
remarks, "is in a certain sense revealed, in a certain
sense is concealed ; he is at once known and unknown."
That is to say — his meaning obviously is — the Deity
is known as revealed to faith, and unknown, as infinite,
through the exercise of the reflective reason. The
knowledge derived through faith immeasurably over-
passes that acquired by thought. Dr. Thornwell, who,
with a philosophical genius akin to Hamilton's,
criticises the position of the great Scotchman in refer-
ence to the cognoscibility of the infinite, enounces the
distinction for which I am now contending when
speaking of the knowledge even of finite substance.
His language is : "In our knowledge of the finite there

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 403

are evidently two elements or factors. There is, first,
the relative and phenomenal, which can be conceived
and known ; this is the proper object of thought. There
is, secondly, the substance or substratum, the quasi
absolute, which cannot be represented in thought, but
which is positively believed as existing. One element
addresses itself to the intelligence and the other to
faith. * * * It is in and through the phenomena that
substance is known." Here knowledge in one relation
is attributed to conception, and in another to faith.
These citations are sufficient to indicate that the view
now insisted upon was at bottom held by both these
great thinkers, to wit: that faith and knowledge are
not contrasted, but that knowledge is a product of
which at one time faith is the efficient, and at another
time, conception.

I would take occasion, in connection with this sub-
ject, to remark briefly upon the vexed question of the
relation, in the order of sequence, between faith and
knowledge ; for that is the form in which the question
is nearly always stated, although the terms of the rela-
tion ought to be, not faith and knowledge, but faith
and thought. It would appear to be evident that, first
of all, would come a fundamental belief or faith, and
then a special act of cognition furnishing a certain
kind of knowledge, and lastly, a particular exercise of
faith resulting in another kind of knowledge. Let me
illustrate by two cases — one drawn from the sphere of
nature, the other from that of grace. We have, it is
now well-nigh universally admitted, at the root of our
faculties fundamental law^s of belief, which are elicited
into exercise upon the occasions which occur in expe-
rience. Among these, characterised by simplicity and
necessity, is the intuitive faith in the relation of effect

404 The Life Work of

to cause. We behold a new event. Something begins
to be which did not exist before. What takes place?
Apparently there is first the cognition of the event.
But back of that act of cognition lay the fundamental
law of belief in the relation of cause and effect. That
law, existing prior to the cognition, but latent and
undeveloped to consciousness, is now elicited by the
perceptive act, and the result is a special exercise of
faith, necessitating the inference that the event per-
ceived was due to some sufficient cause. Take a case
from the supernatural sphere. A sinner believes in
Christ as his Saviour. What is the order here ? First,
there is the capacity and tendency to believe — a funda-
mental law of the spiritual life, imparted by the grace
of regeneration. Then there is an apprehension m
thought of the propositions of the gospel which offer
Christ to sinners, and, lastly, there is the special act of
faith by which the soul receives those propositions as
the testimony of God, embraces the Saviour, and
knows Him unto salvation. We would infer from this
analysis that the special cognitive acts of thought are
preceded by fundamental faiths, and that the special
cognitive acts of faith are occasioned by the particular
exercises of the thinking faculty ; and it would further
follow that the knowledge which results from percep-
tion, and reasoning, is of oi^e kind, and that produced
by faith is of another sort.

There is but one difficulty which I can conceive in
this statement of the order of procedure among the
mental powers in the evolution of knowledge. It is
one which arises from the fact, that it is not uncom-
mon to rank primitive concepts, as well as primary
or intuitive faiths, among the fundamental data of
consciousness. If by primitive concepts be meant

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 405

formed and developed knowledges, as the term would
strictl}^ imply, it is evident that the theory of their
existence is based in mistake. Whatever were Locke's
defects, he exploded the doctrine of innate ideas as
involving formalised knowledge. If it be meant that
they are laws of thought bearing the same regulative
relation to the specific acts of thougiit as the laws of
belief may be conceived to sustain to the special exer-
cises of faith, the question of their separate existence
would be a fair one. It would seem, however, to be
unnecessary to make the distribution. The funda-
mental laws of belief are usually considered as hold-
ing, in the form of certain necessities of knowing, a
common relation to all the cognitive functions. But
if the distinction be admitted between the primary
laws of thought and those of belief, it is obvious that,
as both classes would equally lie at the very founda-
tions of the mental processes, there could be no pre-
cedence of one to the other. They would be concur-
rently evolved, each in its own special direction. It
cannot be shown that, in the last analysis, faith is
ever grounded in thought. The probability lies the
other way — that our fundamental faiths lie at the
basis of all our mental acts. Knowledge begins in
faith, and ends in faith.

Having endeavored to clear away certain difficulties
which lay in the path of the discusion, by indicating
the relations of faith and reason, and of faith and
knowledge, and by calling attention to the real dis-
tinction which deserves emphasis, viz., that between
faith and thought as specific functions of the reason
and specific factors of knowledge, we are prepared to
take up the question as to the validity of our knowl-

406 The Life Work of

edge of the Infinite, and as to the mode of its posses-
sion.

There are two sorts of revelation which God has
furnished — the first natural, the second supernatural.
Natural revelation is the testimony of God to natural
truth — concerning himself, man, and the relations
involved. That testimony — the unwritten word of
God — is contained in the microcosm within man, and
the macrocosm without him. It is imbedded in his
make and constitution, and utters itself in every
energy which wakes to activity from the profoundest
depths of the soul. It whispers in consciousness, thun-
ders in conscience, and breaks into doxologies in the
instinctive worship of the heart. Every bodily sense
gives it a tongue. It proclaims itself at the gates
through which the procession of the mental powers
marches out to communicate with the external world,
and through which a mighty host of influences from
the universe without throngs into the capacious courts
of the human spirit. It breathes in the air, shouts in
the storm, and lifts up its awful voice in the roar of
tempestuous seas. By day, it is read in the light
poured out upon the earth like a baptism of glory, and
by night unrolls its flaming register upon the distant
vault of heaven. In a word, the testimony of God
afforded by natural revelation is inscribed upon every
power of man, and upon every element of external
nature.

Supernatural revelation is the testimony of God to
supernatural and redemptive truth — concerning him-
self, man, and the relations involved. This is furnished
in the Scriptures. They discharge a twofold office.
In the first place, they republish and confirm the les-
sons of reason, of the external universe, and of the

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 407

Covenant of Works as a positive element in the first
religion of man as an unfallen being. They bring out
afresh and illuminate the testimony of God furnished
in natural revelation, but rendered, in great measure,
illegible, inaudible, and impotent by the deadening
influence of sin. In the second place, they create the
knowledge of the scheme of redemption, reveal the orig-
inal principles of God's moral government under new
modifications and altogether singular and distinctive
methods of application, and unveil to the gaze of a
holy universe, an attribute of the divine nature which
had not previously terminated upon its appropriate
objects — the lovely quality of mercy, yearning over the
guilty, the wretched, and the lost, and suggesting their
recovery from sin and hell through the blood of the
eternal Son, and the grace of the eternal Spirit. The
gospel, therefore, is not coextensive with the Scrip-
tures. They are generic; it is specific. So far as the
Scriptures reveal redemption for sinners, they are the
gospel.

Corresponding to these two kinds of revelation, and
to the respective divine testimonies yielded through
them, there are two sorts of faith — natural and super-
natural. Generically considered, faith, as fundamental
and undeveloped, is an aptitude for, and as elicited
into act, an assent to, truth upon evidence, and com-
monly evidence in the form of testimony. Truth is
the object, faith the organ, and testimony the ground.
Specifically contemplated, natural faith is an aptitude
for, or assent to, the truths of natural revelation upon
the testimony of God.

Supernatural faith — the product of the regenerating
grace of the Holy Ghost — in so far as it is funda-
mental and regulative, is an undeveloped spiritual

408 The Life Work of

power lying at the roots of the renewed nature, and
adapted to the reception of the transcendent truths of
redemption upon the written testimony of God. In
so far as it is brought out into special exercise, it
actually receives the truths of the gospel upon God's
testimony, and embraces and relies upon the Lord
Jesus Christ as the only Saviour of sinners.

Let us now inquire into the functions of these
respective sorts of faith in regard to the infinite ele-
ment in natural and supernatural revelation; and the
apostle Paul shall furnish us a text for the discussion :
"He that cometh to God must helieoe that he is."

1. We begin with natural faith. The proposition
which I desire to establish is, that there is in the soul
a fundamental faith which adapts it to the knowledge
of the Infinite Being, and that, when developed
through experience, it positively affirms his existence.
It is in this way w^e know God as infinite, and not
through the processes of the thinking reason. It has
been the common opinion of theologians that the
knowledge of God is intuitive. It is not to be under-
stood that they meant, by the use of this language, to
affirm that there is any presentative knowledge of
him. Intuition, though sometimes employed in that
sense, is not in this relation. Had we such a knowl-
edge of God, we could describe him as we do objects
upon which we gaze. AVhat they intended was, that
man is so constituted that the truth of the divine
existence is self-evident — it vouches for itself b}^ its
own light. Of course, by such a doctrine, if it be not
unmeaning, they designed to teach that there is an
intuitive knowledge of an infinite Being. As speci-
mens of theological consent in this matter, I cite a
witness from the Keformation period, one from a later

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 409

age, and two from our own time. Calvin, sometimes,
is wont to say that the knowledge of God is implanted
in the mind, and at othei^ that it is carved into it.
De Moor, in his able and learned Commentary on
Marck's Compendium, expressly draws a distinction
between the notitla itisita and the iwtitia acquisita —
the implanted and the acquired knowledge of God.
Dr. Charles Hodge, by a convincing argument, sus-
tains the position that such knowledge is intuitive;
and Dr. Thornwell, although somewhat guarded in his
language, admitted that there is a fundamental faith
which necessitates the inference of the Divine exis-
tence. And yet it seems strange that, notwithstanding
these express admissions, the two last-named illus-
trious divines were reluctant to concede the impossi-
bility of knowing the Infinite Being through the pro-
cesses of the discursive understanding. They criticise
the doctrine of the great Scotch philosopher, that we
know the Infinite only by faith, and appear to hold,
that by thinking away limitations, and removing
imperfections, from our concepts of finite manifesta-
tions of the Infinite, we may reach, though only a
partial, yet a real and valid knowledge of it. I must
confess that, to my mind, such a process of the think-
ing faculty, however indefinitely prosecuted, could
only avail to give an ever-enlarging conception of the
finite. We know the Infinite Being, as infinite, by
faith ; we know his finite manifestations by perception
and thought.

There are criteria by which the existence of funda-
mental beliefs may be tested — they are self-evidence,
simplicity, and necessity. If a principle is revealed in
its own light, if it cannot be resolved into simpler ele-
ments, if it must be admitted in a healthful and

410 The Life Work or

normal condition of the faculties, it ought to be
acknowledged to be primary and fundamental. Uni-
versality, though not strictly one of these coordinate
criteria, is a fair proof of necessity. Beliefs which we
find existing in every partially civilised tribe of men,
and expressed in the language of every people pos-
sessed of even a moderate degree of cultivation, are
proved by that fact to be necessary. Subjected to these
tests, the belief in the Infinite, and, I am disposed to
think, in an Infinite Being, will be evinced as one of
the fundamental faiths of the human mind. It cer-
tainly is characterised by simplicity, for it cannot be
resolved into anything more ultimate. It will be said
that it cannot abide the tests of self-evidence and
necessit}^, in view of the fact, first, that there are some
who are ignorant of it; and, secondly, that there are
some who theoretically deny it. To the first objection
it is easy to reply that no acknowledged intuition is
developed in the mind of an infant, and that there are
tribes of men who, in intellectual culture, are in an
infantile condition. The belief in substance is self-
evident and necessary, whenever the faculties are
developed by education; but there may be an intellec-
tual state so brutish that it is not elicited into exercise.
There is a failure, even on the part of some philoso-
phers, to distinguish between the originality and the
comparative maturity of a principle. Paley, for exam-
ple, confounded the maturity and the originality of
conscience. It is conceded that a fundamental faith,
like a fundamental law of morality, depends for even
its loAvest development upon the conditions furnished
by experience, and that the degrees of its expansion
correspond Avith the degrees of a regular and normal
cultivation of the faculties. It is susceptible of doubt.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 411

moreover, whether the cases are not exceedingly few,
in which men have been found in so dwarfed a state
of the intellectual and moral faculties, as not to pos-
sess some belief in the illimitable.

To the second objection — that there are some who
theoretically den}^ the existence of an Infinite Being —
it may be answered that the number of such thinkers
is just exceptional enough to challenge attention to the
general rule. The rash and abnormal expressions of a
few men cannot be assumed as at all affecting the con-
sentient faith of the race. It is worthy of notice that
when God himself deigns to speak of those who deny
his existence, he stigmatises them not so much as crim-
inals, but as fools. The indescribable folly of such a
course would appear to transcend its impiety. It is
to the credit even of a sinful and infatuated race, that
this variety of it, like the mutilated specimens of some
animal species, are very limited in number. They may
emj^hatically be regarded as livsus naturae^ since in
their production nature seems to indulge in a horrible
amusement at her own expense ; and so, by the hideous
caricature of herself, proves that the sin which has
revolutionized her integrity is as besotted as it is
devilish.

The whole difficulty, if any there be, is relieved of
force by the simple consideration that there is scarcely
any self-evident truth which has not had some one to
deny it. It would seem as if the ultimate effect of sin
would be to craze the reason, and to convert the world
into a lunatic asylum.

Having endeavored to prove, positively, that there
is a fundamental law of belief which guarantees the
Infinite, I pass on to show, negatively, that we can
reach the knowledge of the Infinite in no other way —

412 The Life Work of

that it is not possible for thought to furnish it. It is
the province of the thinking faculties to receive the
information furnished by perception, to conceive, to
form judgments from concepts, to construct arguments
from judgments — to j^roceed by analysis and sjm thesis,
by induction and deduction. It is clear that as each
one of these powers is limited to phenomenal prop-
erties, the conclusions which they reach must be char-
acterised by a corresponding limitation. There cannot
be in the conclusion more than is contained in the
premises. Let us test this law of the processes of
thought by a single illustration. Take the notion of
substance. How do we know it? That about which
perception and conception are concerned, is simply the
phenomenal properties. Think away, for example,
from this desk all its properties — its dimensions, its
configuration, its color, its divisibility, and others
which belong to it — and what remains to be appre-
hended in thought ? Nothing. And yet we must postu-
late the existence of a substance in which these prop-
erties inhere, and of which they are the phenomenal
manifestations. What we know in thought is the acci-
dents, what we know by faith is the substance. In
like manner think away thought, feeling, desire, voli-
tion, moral perceptions from the mind, and what
remains to be conceived? Nothing. Still we must
demand a substance, which is ourselves, to which these
qualities belong and which they express. How do we
know it ? Not by conception, but by faith. The knowl-
edge of the substance is as valid as the knowledge of
the properties. The explanation of the process would
seem to be clear. The cognitive apprehension of the
phenomenal manifestations elicits into exercise a hith-
erto dormant fundamental law of belief: that necessi-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 413

tates the inference from the properties that the sub-
stance exists; and that inference is precisely a special
act of faith. It is necessary — we cannot avoid it. It
is immediate, — it differs entirely from the mediate
inference of the syllogistic process. There is no enthy-
meme with a suppressed premise; for there is no sup-
pressed premise to be supplied. We pass, fev saltunh^
from the concept of the properties to the existence of
the substance. Now what is true of our knowledge of
finite substance, is, a fortiori^ true of our knowledge
of an infinite substance. Let us take, for instance, the
famous cosmological argument. We cognize effects,
and effects upon a stupendous scale. We refer them
to an adequate first cause. That, however, only gives
us a sufficient, not an infinite, cause. The effects are
apprehended as finite ; the cause that is postulated need
not be more than a vast finite cause. Were the process
purely ratiocinative, that would be the result. Limited
and conditioned effects, however great, demand no
more than a limited and conditioned cause. But this,
it will be said, is not a complete account of the argu-
ment. We cognize the cosmical effects as changing,
fluctuating, contingent; and we refer them to a first
cause which is unchanging, unfluctuating, uncontin-
gent — that is, to a necessary Being who has the reason
of his existence in himself. But given a necessary
Being, and we have an infinite Being. Now, in
regard to this procedure, we submit a few remarks:
In the first place, it is based, even in its simplest form,
upon a fundamental law of belief, namely, the prin-
ciple which demands a cause for every effect, and a
cause sufficient for, and corresponding to, the effects.
What, then, is the process ? By perception and thought
we apprehend the phenomenal effects, and the funda-

414 The Lite Work of

mental law of causality necessitates the inference to
the cause. That inference is but a special act of faith.
Call it judgment, if you will, but it has no middle. It
is immediate and necessary, and therefore ceases to
be ratiocinative, and takes on the complexion of faith.
In the second place, the inference from contingent
effects to a necessary Being as their cause is only legiti-
mated by a similar fundamental law of belief. The
mere process of thinking would never conduct us to it.
In the third place, it is possible to doubt whether the
affirmation of a necessary Being is tantamount to the
affirmation of an infinite Being. It may be conceiv-
able that a Being might have the reason of his exist-
ence in himself, and yet not contain all that is strictly
demanded by the notion of the Infinite. But granted
that such a result follows from the attainment of a
necessary first cause, and still it is urged that the
knowledge of that Being is the product, not of the con-
ceiving and reasoning process, but of an act of faith
enforced by a fundamental and regulative law of
belief. Why not admit that there is a primary and
intuitive faith, which is at once an aptitude and a
guarantee for the knowledge of the Infinite? I have
already attempted to show that there exists such a
fundamental principle, which will stand the test of
criteria by which the existence of such primitive laws
are determined.

Let us then start with that assumption, and indi-
cate the steps of the process by which an actual knowl-
edge of the Infinite Being is reached. Let it be
observed that there is not here even a squinting to the
theory of the Absolutist philosophers — that we imme-
diately know the Infinite Being as the result of this
law of belief. Were that possible, what could we

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 415

know ? Nothing but the Infinite Being Himself, with-
out the qualification of a single attribute. Properties
as such, are only apprehended by perception and
thought. These faculties cannot, therefore, be over-
slaughed in the effort to answer the question, What
God is, as well as the question. Does God exist ? Hence
it is no marvel that Cousin, who contended that the
mere possession of the belief in the Infinite necessi-
tates the immediate knowledge of the Infinite God,
denied his personality, and made the human reason
itself impersonal. It is true that the term Infinite,
unless it symbolises nothing, and language in its most
solemn and impressive form be only an imposture
practiced ujDon our faculties by themselves or by some
malignant spirit, implies the existence of a corre-
sponding reality. But that determines nothing in
reference to the mode by which the knowledge so rep-
resented is ultimately attained. What is that mode ?

Consciousness and external perception furnish for
thought the phenomena of our own being and those of
the external world. We perceive them as effects, and
effects upon a vast, an universal scale. The fimda-
mental belief in the Infinite, elicited into exercise by
these conditions of experience, induces the inference,
in the form of a special act of faith, not only of a first
cause, but of an infinite first cause. We cognize the
moral phenomena of our minds; we infer a moral
lawgiver and ruler. This conducts us, however, only
to one w^ho has knowledge and power sufficient to
enable him to govern the universe. The fundamental
belief in the Infinite leads to the inference, by a special
faith, in the infinity of the moral Kuler. We are con-
scious of the sense of dependence, and of religious
tastes and emotions which infer a Being of vast knowl-

416 The Life AVork or

edge and power, and of beauty, loA^eliness, and glory
as the object of worship. But we have not reached
the Infinite. That is given by faith. AVe know the
Infinite Creator, Governor, and Object of worship, as
infinite, not by thought, but by faith.

To be more particular: for it is special cases which
are the tests of theories. How do we acquire the
knowledge of infinite attributes? Let us take the
instance of j^ower. We cognize effects, which we are
constrained to refer to power as their cause. That
reference is itself necessitated by a fundamental belief.
But finite effects can only give us finite power. I do
not deny that we have a real and valid knowledge, by
conception, of the finite manifestations of infinite
power, just as we have the knowledge, by conception,
of our own power and of the forces of nature, in their
lower degrees of exercise, as well as their higher. But
still we have only reached limited power. We then,
by the thinking faculty, endeavor to remove all limi-
tations, and to attain the concept of an unlimited and
illimitable power. We fail; for conception cannot
grasp the Infinite. Here faith comes in, and projects
the highest concept of finite power into the region of
the infinite. Without the condition afforded by the
thinking process, faith would sleep; without faith
roused into activity by that condition, thought would
stop infinitely short of the Infinite.

Indulge a figure for a moment. Faith and Thought
— ^twin powers — go forth together to the examination
of phenomena, of effects and properties; and at first
Faith leans upon the arm of her sister. Thought pro-
ceeding upon the phenomenal contents of perception,
rises concept by concept, and removes imperfection
after imperfection, in her endeavor to reach the Infi-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 417

nite. Foiled in her attempt, she sinks in her final
effort, breathless and exhausted, on the hither side of
the chasm, which opens up between the highest con-
cept of the finite and the Infinite God. "Art tired,
sister?" says Faith; "rest thou here, until I essay the
passage of this gulf." Then stretching her hitherto
folded wings, and planting her feet on the last stand-
ing ground of Thought, as her point of departure, she
flies across the ocean impassable to her feebler sister,
home to the bosom of the Infinite Being. She sees the
invisible God, hears his inaudible voice, and, by a
mysterious and inexplicable power, apprehends his
infinitude. Then returning, she furnishes her grand
knowledge to Thought, and ever after the form of the
Infinite, so to speak, is imposed upon the processes of
the finite understanding. Thenceforward Faith and
Thought unite their forces, and reason together con-
cerning the infinite, as though it had been an original
datum of the thinking faculty. The same line of argu-
ment might be pursued in regard to the other
attributes — wisdom, holiness, justice, goodness, and
truth. By conception, we validly apprehend them in
their finite manifestations. This gives us, so to speak,
their quality, under the imperfect but real analogies
presented by the properties of our own being. By
faith we know them as infinite. And then the irre-
sistible inference is to the existence of an Infinite sub-
stance, of which they are the wholly singular and
peculiar properties. It deserves to be remarked, that
in this account of the mode by which we reach the
knowledge of the Infinite, I have described the reflec-
tive rather than the spontaneous process. So much
for the office of natural faith in conducting us, upon

418 The Life Work of

the evidence furnished by natural revelation, to the
knowledge of an Infinite God.

2. The limits of this discourse will allow only a
brief reference to the distinctive influence of super-
natural faith in regard to the knowledge of the Infi-
nite. And, indeed, it is not necessary to prosecute in
detail that branch of the inquiry, for the reason that
what has been said of the office of natural faith may,
by an easy change of the terms and relations involved,
be applied to that which is supernatural. The latter
kind of faith reaffirms all that the former declares,
and, in addition, discharges a characteristic office in
receiving all that the written Word and the Spirit
reveal of the infinite perfections of God, under the
transcendent relations of Redemption. The apostle
Paul tells us that "through faith we understand that
the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that
things which are seen were not made of things which
do appear;" and that "he that cometh to God must
believe that he is, and that he is the rewarder of such
as diligently seek him." In these remarkable words
we are taught that there are truths which, though
ihej lie beyond the range of the discursive faculties,
are known by faith. The existence of God, the crea-
tion of the worlds out of nothing, the infinite moral
government of the Divine Ruler, and his infinite per-
fections as the supreme object of worship, are all
among the cognita of faith. Our blessed Saviour also
teaches that this mysterious power belongs to faith.
"This," says he, "is eternal life, that they may know
thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou
hast sent." Thus to know God, is to know him as
infinite, for only an infinite is the true God; and thus
to know Jesus Christ, is to know him as an infinitely

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 419

sufficient and merciful Redeemer, A knowledge of the
Infinite, Paul expressly assigns to faith, and that of
which our Saviour speaks is of course attributable
alone to the same exalted principle. This ought to set-
tle the question of the cognoscibility of God by faith ;
and, I humbly conceive, does confirm what I have
claimed for the office of faith in furnishing the infinite
element in our knowledge. It may be said, however,
that faith is a spiritual conception. In a sense, this
is true. When the believer cognizes the facts of reve-
lation w^hich are level to the apprehension of the unbe-
liever, he knows them after a spiritual fashion which
is impossible to the latter. But there are other ele-
ments which not even the renewed thinking powers
are competent to understand. It is a supernatural
faith, as distinguished from thought, and it alone,
which apprehends the infinite perfections of a Redeem-
ing God, and the transcendent, the inconceivable facts
and relations and ends of the glorious scheme of
redemption.

It only remains to gather up the results of this dis-
cussion, and show their bearing upon the question
with which we began — whether the fact that theology
involves an infinite element bars its claims to be
regarded as a science. It is urged that as science pro-
ceeds by definition, the infinite cannot be made an ele-
ment of it, because to define it is to limit it, and that
involves a contradiction. The difficulty is removed
by noting the distinction between logical definition
and limitation as to extent. To illustrate : Unless we
take the ground of the Pantheist, we must distinguish
the divine substance from all created substances. He
is not they, and they are not he. We define, but we
do not limit the divine essence as to extent. It is

420 The Life Work of

immense, and contains the sum of all being, but it is
different from finite essence. Further : We distinguish
between the divine attributes. Justice, for example,
is not mercy. We define, but we do not limit these
attributes as to extent. They coexist as equally infi-
nite, but they are both really and logically distinguish-
able. We are forced to do this, not only in theological
statement, but in ordinary preaching. There is a
sense, therefore, in which we are obliged to define the
infinite, but in which we by no means limit it as to
extent. There is, then, no contradiction emerging on
this score from the introduction of the infinite into
the scientific procedure of theolog}^ A distinction
must also be taken between different sorts of knowl-
edge of the Infinite Being. It is one thing to say that
by faith we know the fact of God's existence, and quite
another that we know the lioic of his existence — we
know that his essence is, but not how it is. The latter
we cannot know, for we are not God; but the former
we not only may but do know. It is known as revealed
to faith. It is susceptible of affirmation and nega-
tion— may be made a term of human judgments. In
like manner, a divine attribute cannot be perfectly
comprehended by us, but it may be known as an infi-
nite perfection by faith; and as known may be made
the subject or the predicate of a proposition. Concep-
tion may furnish one term and faith the other, and
3^et the proposition be valid. For example, we are
entitled to make the affirmation: the justice of God is
infinite. Conception gives justice, a particular kind
of perfection, as the subject, and faith gives the term
infinite as predicable of justice. Here, then, we have
an infinite element as a valid constituent of a premise,
and as other premises may be constructed in the same

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 421

way, legitimate conclusions may be drawn. But if we
may reason about the infinite and from the infinite, it
is manifest that it may constitute a valid element in
human science, under the limitations, however, which
have been pointed out. To all this it may be objected
that it involves a mere juggle of words — that the term
infinite is a symbol of nothing real and positive, but
represents only a bald negation. We deceive ourselves
by the "fatal imposture" of words. Then, if that be
so, an infinite God means nothing, and infinite guilt
means nothing, and infinite mercy means nothing, and
nothing an infinite Saviour and an infinite salvation.
They are mere negative conceptions; at best but pro-
tests in thought against the absolute restrictions
implied in positive affirmations of the thinking reason.
No doubt it would be pleasant to some to get quit of
an eternal hell as a mere negative concept, a grim play
upon words; and that^ it is likely, is the end sought by
the objection ; but we insist on an infinite Redemption
and. an eternal heaven as something more than a mere
charlatanry, a petty quackery, of terms. It deserves
to be carefully considered by those who either deny
the knowledge of the Infinite altogether, or affirm
what is impossible and must have a terrible recoil —
that mere thought can furnish us that knowledge —
what a practical sweep these positions imply. They
threaten the foundations of both natural and super-
natural religion. But if we are made to know God,
and not to know him as infinite is not properly to
know him at all ; if he has laid deep in the very ground-
forms of the human soul a fundamental faith adapt-
ing us to that knowledge ; if he has so constructed our
powers as by the very virtue of their energies to con-
duct us to it, and if he has been pleased more fuUv and

422 The Life AVork of

explicitly to reveal it to us in his written AVord — what
hinders that, in the employment of our reasoning
powers, which were made with an adaptation to order
and system, we should attempt to arrange and digest
that knowledge into a theoretical and practical science
of religion ? If the term infinite has no corresponding
reality, it is of course admitted that there can be no
science which invoh-es an infinite element ; but it also
follows that there can be to us no God. But if the
knowledge of the infinite Being and his infinite per-
fections be a real and not a delusive human knowledge,
it may, under proper restrictions, be made the sub-
ject of scientific treatment, both inductive and deduc-
tive. Xot only does the theologian act upon this
assumption, but every preacher of the gospel proceeds
upon it. He reasons concerning the Infinite induc-
tively when, for example, by a collation of infinite
titles and attributes and works, he establishes the
divinitv of Christ or the Holy Spirit. He reasons con-
cerning it deductively, whenever, in reply to the dif-
ficulty of the sinner that his sins are infinitely great
and deserve infinite reprobation, he infers the possi-
bility of his pardon from the infinite mercy of God,
from an infinite atonement, and from the infinite
ability and willingness of Jesus Christ to save. It is
obvious that there is a sense in which the Infinite not
only may, but does and must enter into the reasoning
processes of the human mind. That being conceded,
the possibility of a science of theology is granted.
Soberly and reverently to reason about God is not to
dishonor him; not to do it is to degrade ourselves.

This is the science of sciences which the theological
instructor is called to teach. It deals with the high
problems of the infinite, the unchangeable, the eternal.

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 423

as well as with questions adjusted to the measures of
the finite intelligence. It lays under tribute every
other science, subordinates its lessons to its supreme
religious end, and, recapitulating the resources of all
into its own grand unity, it offers the collected results in
adoring worship before the altar of God. Exploring
three worlds in the scope of its mighty induction, exam-
ining by its analysis the doctrines of Natural Relig-
ion, and the sublimer principles of Redemption, it
employs its comprehensive synthesis in the construc-
tion of a system which refuses to be a cold and formal
digest, and rises, step by step, into an immortal epic,
moving to the passionate notes of a triumphal anthem,
and pouring its rich and thrilling doxologies into the
ear of the Triune God. Not confined within temporal
limits, death will lay no arrest upon its quest of truth,
but translated with the glorified Church into the eter-
nal sphere, it will develop its principles through the
everlasting ages. The infinite perfections of God will
be its text-book, Redemption its transcendent theme,
Heaven its seminary, and Eternity its time of study.

NOTES.

p. 399. In the remarks made upon the relation of faith to reason,
and the denial of any generic difference between them, the term
reason is not employed specifically, as designating either the noetic or
the dianoetic faculty. It appears to me illegitimate to treat reason
as no more than the discursive understanding. It is more comprehen-
sive than the faculty of reasoning. What has been here maintained is,
that faith is a function of reason in its widest sense. It is not, how-
ever, intended to confine faith to the domain of the intellect proper.
It would seem to involve the feelings in the form of the special emo-
tion of trust. Faith is an intellectual exercise, so far forth as it is a
conviction of the existence of a being or of the truth of a proposition.
It is a feeling, so far forth as it involves trust in any being, or con-
fidence in the truth of any proposition. This is true of supernatural
faith, and, for aught that appears to the contrary, is truth also of nat-
ural faith. In both cases an intellectual and an emotional function
are discharged in one concrete, personal act. But to contradistinguish

424 The Life Work of

faith from reason, or to place it in antagonism to right reason, is to
strip it of its most fundamental feature — an intelligent assent to
truth.

P. 401. In the first draft of the preceding Address, the term cogni-
tion was used in what was admitted to be a strict and narrow sense.
As an act, it was contradistinguished from faith as a certain kind of
knowing ; and as a result, from the knowledge which is distinctively
the product of faith. A term was needed which would group inlo
unity, and compendiously express, all the acts of the mind by which it
knows, excepting faith. Conception was too narrow, as excluding per-
ception on the one hand, and on the other, judgment, and reasoning.
Nor did the term thought appear to be wide enough, for, strictly
speaking, it does not include percepts, but begins with concepts ; and
in adopting it, for the sake of clearness, in the present form of the
Address, it has been found necessary to employ some circumloculion.
Cognition, in a limited signification, answered the purpose ; and there
was high authority for that manner of using it. Sir William Hamil-
ton (Discussions, p. 578), says: "Thinking (employing that term as
comprehending all our cognitive energies) is of two kinds. " Again,
(Discussions, p. 608), he says: "Of things absolutely or in them-
selves, be they external, be they internal, we know nothing, or know
them only as incognisable." It must be conceded, however, that the
prevalent usage is adverse to this restricted employment of the term,
and the Address has been recast so as to eliminate the ambiguity occa-
sioned by it, and to render unnecessary a mere criticism of words.

P. 404. Sir William Hamilton, the most pronounced advocate of the
existence of fundamental laws of belief, as original principles in the
constitution of the human mind, expressly excepts the law of causality
from that category. While admitting the necessity of the causal judg-
ment, he denies that it is the result of an original principle. The law
which demands a cause for every thing which begins to be, he main-
tains, is one which is derived from experience. It is but a special
application of the great law of the Conditioned, viz. : that positive
thought lies between two contradictory extremes, neither of which can
be conceived as, possible, but one of which, on the principle of Excluded
Middle, must be admitted as true. The positive thought of cause,
accordingly, lies between two contradictory extremes : one, the fact of
an absolute commencement ; the other, the fact of an infinite non-com-
raencement. Neither of these extremes is conceivable. But the fact of
an absolute commencement must be admitted to be true, on the ground
that consciousness affirms it in the case of every free act of the will.
Consciousness attests the fact that what thus begins to be, absolutely
begins to be, that is, it is not related to anything previously existing
which determines it. Now this fact, vouched for by a deliverance of
consciousness, beyond which there can be no appeal, is inconceivable.
The mind is impotent to think it. It is unable to think that anything
which appears to begin to exist is an addition to the sum of exist-
ence. This impotence of mind necessitates the judgment that what
thus appears to begin to exist in one form, must have had a previous
existence in another form, — that is, that the existence of a thing in

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 425

one form is caused bj^ its existence in another form. Tiius it is shown
that the causal judgment — the positive thought of cause — lies between
two contradictory and inconceivable extremes, one of which, however,
is proved to be true by the testimony of consciousness, viz. : the fact
of an absolute commencement. But the inability of the mind to think
that fact, necessitates the postulation of a cause for everything which
appears to begin to exist. This, in brief, is Hamilton's account of the
genesis of the causal notion. Now, argues he, the alleged existence of
an original law of belief, which necessitates the positive affirmation
that everything which begins to be must have had a cause, is contra-
dicted by the deliverance of the fact of an absolute commencement by
consciousness. Unless, therefore, consciousness lies, the existence of
such an original principle must be denied.

It will be perceived that the argument is based upon the assumption
that consciousness gives the fact of an absolute commencement. The
only proof of the fact which Hamilton adduces is the consciousness of
it. Now, if it can be shown that we can have no consciousness of the
alleged fact, it must be abandoned as destitute of proof ; for if, as he
says, it is inconceivable, it is beyond the reach of the discursive under-
standing. That we cannot be conscious of an absolute commencement
may, I humbly submit, be evinced upon Hamilton's elaborately estab-
lished opinions as to consciousness taken into connection with his
express admissions in this argument.

1. In the first place, he explicitly admits that the fact of an absolute
commencement is inconceivable — that it cannot be thought. Now, if
as he affirms, we are conscious of an absolute commencement, it would
follow that we are conscious of what is inconceivable, of what is impos-
sible to thought. But his own doctrine is, that thought and conscious-
ness are concurrent and inseparable. Consciousness, he contends, is
the condition of all thinking, feeling, willing, etc. ; in a word, of all
our mental acts. There can be no mental act without consciousness,
and, of course, there can be no consciousness of an act, if the act does
not exist. But in this case, consciousness and thought are divorced.
The consciousness of an absolute commencement conditions no thought ;
it conditions the vacancy of thought. There is no act of thinking, for,
ex hypothesi, the fact is unthinkable. There can be, consequently, no
consciousness of an absolute commencement.

Nor will it do to say that we may be conscious of a belief in the fact
though it be inconceivable ; for Hamilton grounds the belief of the fact
in the consciousness of it, and not the consciousness of it mediately in
the belief of it.

2. In the second place, Hamilton expressly and formally teaches that
consciousness is only possible in cases in which immediate knowledge
is involved. We are conscious only of that which we immediately
know. And, in this relation, he uses the terms intuitive knowledge,
presentative knowledge, and immediate knoicledge, as equivalents.
There can be no mistake as to his doctrine upon this subject. He
illustrates it very clearly in the case in which we reproduce a past
event in memory. The event itself, as past, is mediately known
through a vicarious representation of it in the mind. What we imme-
diately know, is not the past event, but the mental modification which

426 The Life AYork of

represents it. Now, saj's Hamilton, we are conscious of the repre-
senting image as immediately known, but of the past event itself, as
only mediately known, we have no consciousness. If, then, we are
conscious of the fact of an absolute commencement, it follows directly
from his own doctrine that it is immediately known — that it is intui-
tively and presentatively given. If so, as it is face to face with us,
we perceive it, and, of course, can subsequently construe it in thought.
It is first perceivable and then conceivable. But Hamilton contends
that the fact of an absolute commencement is inconceivable. It is one
of the contradictory and inconceivable extremes between which lies the
positive concept of cause. We have then upon his principles an incon-
ceivable fact apprehended in an act of immediate, presentative knowl-
edge. There is here a manifest contradiction, and the argument which
evinces it is very simple : We cannot be conscious of anything which
is not immediately known ; but an absolute commencement, as incon-
ceivable, cannot be immediately known ; therefore, we cannot be con-
scious of it.

We have, therefore, as flowing from Hamilton's doctrine of conscious-
ness, the conclusion that we cannot be conscious of an absolute com-
mencement ; and we have his strong assertion, in this argument con-
cerning the origin of the causal judgment, that we are conscious of it.
It is difficult to imagine so astute a thinker as Hamilton slipping into
a flagrant self-contradiction, and the presumption is so strong against
this supposition that one is disposed to suspect some fatal flaw in the
reasoning which appears to unmask it. It seems, however, but too con-
clusive. If, then, there be a contradiction between the two statements
thus contrasted, it would follow, in accordance with the law which
Hamilton himself so strongly enforces, viz. : that of two contradic-
tories one only can and must be true, that only one of the contradic-
tories here signalised can be true. In making the election we cannot
hesitate. The position that consciousness only exists in cases of imme-
diate knowledge is the most clearly established ; and we are, conse-
quently, forced to reject the contradictory supposition of a conscious-
ness of an absolute commencement as wholly untenable. At least, it
must, upon Hamilton's principles, be denied.

If, now, we are obliged to abandon the hypothesis of the conscious-
ness of an absolute commencement, the only ground alleged for holding
it as a fact is destroyed. There being no consciousness of it, it can-
not be proved to exist — it is to us zero. But as Hamilton finds the
empirical origin of the causal judgment in our inability to think an
absolute commencement, and that is nothing, it would follow that our
impotence to think nothing must result in nothing. His account of
the origin of the notion of causation breaks down. It is not likely
that any similar attempt to assign the law to an empirical source will
prove more successful than that of this great thinker ; and we fall
back on the theory which ranks the law of causality among the origi-
nal and fundamental principles of our mental constitution. The hand
that pulls the laniard may be a feeble one, but if it discharges Hamil-
ton's own battery, it must succeed in demolishing his celebrated struc-
ture of an Absolute Commencement. The fact would seem to be that
his famous speculation upon this subject fails to exhibit even the con-

John L. Girardeau, D. D., LL. D. 427

ditions of experience upon which the causal judgment is elicited. All
that is necessary is, not only that a phenomenal change, but that the
existence of anything be perceived. That occasions the positive infer-
ence that it must have had a cause, and that affirmation is grounded in
a fundamental law of belief.

P. 408. Dr. Calderwood, in his Philosophy of the Infinite, which I
had not read before the delivery of this Address, maintains that we
have an immediate knowledge of God, and' it would follow from that
position that we have a consciousness of Him. On the contrary, I
have endeavored to show that while we have, by faith, a real and
valid knowledge of God, that knowledge is mediate and not immediate.
It is evident that as we cannot directly perceive Him, we can have no
consciousness of Him as an object perceived. Nor, if we admit that we
cannot conceive or think Him, can we be conscious of Him as an object
conceived or thought. But, if we do know Him, as infinite, by faith,
the question might be suggested whether we may not be conscious of
Him as an object believed — whether there may not be what might be
called a faith-consciousness of God. That question will, perhaps, be
best answered by a reference to the distinction between our knowledge
of substance, and of its phenomenal qualities. We are not directly con-
scious of our own substance, either spiritual or material ; that is, we
are not directly conscious either of the substance of our souls or of
that of our bodies ; but only of the qualities which respectively mani-
fest these substances. What then? We believe in the existence of the
substances in which the qualities inhere. Of course, as that belief is
an energy of the mind in operation, we are conscious of it. Now does
it follow that in being conscious of the belief we are conscious of its
objects, viz.: the substances believed to exist? This brings us to the
last analysis. If Hamilton's doctrine be true, that there can be no
consciousness where there is no immediate knowledge, then we are not
conscious of substance. Phenomenal qualities are immediately given
and we are conscious of them, whether mental or material. We then
believe in the substance so manifested, that is, mediately given through
the qualities. The faith is an object of consciousness because one of
immediate knowledge, but the substance believed, not being immediately,
but mediately known, is not an object of consciousness.

This line of argument will appl-y with increased emphasis to our
knowledge of God. We are conscious of perceiving the phenomenal
manifestations of His attributes. Granted that we are also conscious
of these phenomenal manifestations, what then? We believe in the
attributes so manifested. That, I think, is the first step. We are
conscious of the act of faith as immediately known, but not of the
attributes as mediately known. But given the attributes, we neces-
sarily believe in the substance of God, to which the attributes belong.
We are conscious of that second step in faith, but we are not conscious
of the substance of God, because it is not immediately but only medi-
ately given. In short, neither our own substance nor the suDstance of
God is presentatively known and consequently an object of conscious-
ness. This view would seem to be clear. We may raise the question,
as between Reid and Hamilton, whether in being conscious of our per-
ception of an object we are also conscious of the object itself, in the

428 The Life Work of

same concrete act. We might, with Reid, deny ; and then the preced-
ing argument would, of course, be strengthened. For, if in being con-
scious of the act of perception we are not conscious of the object per-
ceived, then, in being conscious of the act of faith we are not conscious
of the object in which we believe. But if we admit the doctrine of
Hamilton and most philosophers, it does not, because, in being con-
scious of perception we are conscious of the object perceived, follow
that in being conscious of faith we are conscious of the object in which
we believe. This, in the case of objects mediately known, Hamilton
denies. Yet he often speaks elliptically of self-consciousness. What I
conceive his phraseology, if expanded, would strictly mean, is, that we
are conscious of attributes from which we immediately and irresistibly
infer our selfhood. Dr. Mansel, however, expressly avows and defends
the doctrine that we are directly conscious of self — that is, if it mean
anything of the substantive existence of the Ego. But even he makes
the consciousness of self an exception to the law that we are not con-
scious of substance. He fails to prove his extraordinary position, and
opens the way of the Absolutist hypothesis — which he vehemently
assails — of the immediate knowledge of the Divine substance.

We believe in the Infinite God. Thus we know Him mediately but
validly. As He is not presentatively given in His essence, we cannot
be directly conscious of Him. We are conscious of His blessed mani-
festations of Himself to us and in us, and we immediately and neces-
sarily infer His attributes, His existence, and our relations to Him.
This doctrine is safe — it is one which nature and the Scriptures
concur in teaching. To say that we cannot know God at all Is to
sweep away the foundations of religion ; to say that we can think
Him, with our narrow grasp of conception, is either to deny practi-
cally that we can know Him, or to make with the philosopher of the
Absolute our knowledge commensurate with that of God — to raise
the finite to the Infinite, or to reduce the Infinite to the finite. We
know His manifestations by thought, we know Him as infinite by
faith. And in claiming this wondrous power for faith, we do not
confound a knowledge of the Infinite with an infinite knowledge, a
faith in the Infinite with an infinite faith. It may increase in inten-
sity, though not in extension. It can never give more than the Infinite
and that it gives now ; but it may more give the Infinite and that
eternally, more and more. On the other hand. Thought knows the
finite. In its grand nisus, it will ever strive to reach the Infinite,
but never will. The comprehension of conception will expand for-
ever, but to eternity will only give the finite. Else comprehending
God, we would have nothing more to know.

INDEX

Adger, John B.

Opposed, like Dr. Girardeau, to
Instrumental Music iij Pub-
lic Worship, 141 ; Relation
of to Dr. Girardeau's Work
for Negroes, 31 ; The Father
of New Book of Church Or-
der, 220.

Adger, Robert

Offer to Dr. Girardeau in Early
Ministry, 34.

Blackburn, George A.

Author of Articles on Ancestry
and Boyhood of Dr. Girar-
deau, 7 ; on Conversion and
Early Ministry of Dr. Girar-
deau, 22 ; on Examples of
Poems and Other Writings,
345 ; on The Man, 366 ; oU
Work Among Negroes, 72.

Son-in-law of Dr. Girardeau,
28.

Successor as Pastor of Arsenal
Hill Church, 377.
Bryan, W. S. P.

Gives Dr. Girardeau's Views of
Prophecy, 372 et seq.

"Calvinism and Evangelical Ar-
minianism," 322, 337.

Columbia Theological Seminary
Call as Professor of Theology
to, 157 ; Controlled by Gen-
eral Assembly, 166 ; Found-
ed, 164 ; Historical Work of,
165 ; Most Honored Son,
339 ; Predecessors in Chair
of Theology, 166 ; Professor
in, 164 ; Reasons Given by
Dr. Girardeau for Accepting
Professorship in Columbia
Seminary, 168-173 ; Student
at Columbia Seminary, 25 ;
Spirit in which Dr. Girar-

deau Entered Upon Profes-
sorship, 173-174.

Deacon

View of Dr. Girardeau as to
Office of, 220 et seq.
"Discussions of Philosophical
Questions," 187, 337, 365 ; Cor-
rects Errors of Hamilton in,
190 et seq.
"Discussions of Theological Ques-
tions," 337, 365.

Education

Change of Views as to Relation
of Church to Education, 229.
Evolution Controversy

Action of Synods on, 281 ; His-
tory of, 231-285 ; Speeches
of Dr. Girardeau on, 234-280.

Federal Theology

"Federal Theology : Its Im-
portant and Regulative In-
fluence"— Address on, 177 et
seq. ; Held by Dr. Girardeau,
177 ; Key to Election, Lim-
ited Atonement — Effectual
Calling and Perseverance of
Saints, 185.

"Freedom of Will in Theological
Relations," 301-302, 337, 365.

Girardeau, John Lafayette

Ancestry, 8-10 ; Arsenal Hill
Church, Dr. Girardeau's Pas-
torate of, 376 ; at Charles-
ton College, 22 ; Call to
Columbia Theological Semin-
ary, 157 ; Charleston College,
Student at, 24 ; Children, 27-
28 ; Christian, 208 ; Church
in Views of, 209 ; Confed-
erate Chaplain, 106 ; Conver-
sationalist, 127-128 ; Conver-

430

Index

sion, 22-24 ; Death, 377-378 ;
Early Years, 10 ; Exciting
Circumstances in His Min-
istry, 101-104 ; Father and
Mother, 10-11, 14-15 ; First
School, 12 ; First Pastorate,
26 ; Funeral, 378 ; Gifts of,
51-52 ; Humorous Incidents
on Ministry to the Negroes,
104 ; Licensure, 26 ; Love for
South Carolina, 59-61 ; Me-
morial of Charleston Presby-
tery, 379-387 ; Moderator of
General Assembly, 255 ; Man,
366-392 ; Marriage, 27 ; Pas-
tor of Glebe Street Church,
137-163 ; Prayer with Dying
Federal Soldiers, 118 ;
Preacher, 52-58, 124-127,
137-144, 208 ; Preaching to
Soldiers, 118 ; Presbyter,
149, 208-230 ; Prisoner, 133 ;
Professor, 164 ; Reasons for
Working for Negroes, 68-72 ;
Reasons for Accepting Call
to Columbia Seminary, 168-
173 ; Rescued from Death
when a Youth, 12-13 : Resig-
nation as Pastor of Glebe St.
Church, 150-156, 159-163 ;
Resignation as Professor in
Columbia Seminary, 206-
207 ; Second School, 15-18 ;
Sermon on "Judgment Day",
122-124, 208-209 ; Sermon on
Sunday after Death of Jef-
ferson Davis, 130-131 ; Slave
Owner, 63-65, 395 ; Student
at Columbia Seminary, 24-25 ;
Teacher, 158, 203-296; The-
ological Views, 177-185 ;
Third School, 18 ; Theolo-
gian, 209, 304-340 : Tutor in
Christ Church Parish, 24 ;
Wilton Church Served as
Second Pastorate, 28-29 ;
Work for Negroes, 32-105 ;
Work While Student at Co-
lumbia Seminary, 25.

Glebe Street Church

Conditions on Which Dr. Girar-
deau Became Pastor, 140 ;
Consolidated with White
Congregation of Zion Church,
136 ; Preaching After War to
Zion Church, 143.

Gospel Ministry

Dr. Girardeau's Success in
Leading Men Into Ministry.
147 ; Views of Dr. Girardeau
as to, 216 et seq.

Hall, W. T.

Author of Article on "The Sem-
inary Professor", 164-207.
Hay, Thos. P.

Estimate of Dr. Girardeau as a
Teacher by, 203 et seq.
Howe, George, D. D. LL. D.
Fellow-Professor with Dr.
Girardeau on Value of Co-
lumbia Seminary, 165, 166.

Imagination, one of Dr. Girar-
deau's Chief Powers, 341 ; Early
Imaginative Writings, 341-346 ;
Poems Inspired by Southern
Cause, 346-350.

"Instrumental Music in the Pub-
lic Worship of the Church,"
364-365.

Instrumental Music Opposed to in
God's House, 216.

In Thesi Deliverances

Famous Debate on Value of,
223 et seq.

Jones, Edward C.

Author of Article on "Work
Among Negroes," 31 et seq.
Justification

Actual and Virtual, 180 et seq.

Law, Thos. H.

Author of Article on Pastorate
After War, 133 et seq.

Index

431

Mack, Joseph B.

Author of Article on "Work
Among Negroes," 51-71 ; Co-
pastor with Dr. Girardeau of
Zion Church, 143.
McLaurin, D. W.

Author of Article on "Confed-
erate Chaplain," 105-138.
Man, the

Christian and Man of God, 371 ;
Friend, 366-368 ; Habits as a
Student, 368-369 ; Home Life,
366 ; Incidents Connected
with Preaching, 369-370; In-
tellectual, Emotional and
Moral Powers, 371 ; Physical
Appearance, 366.
Missions

Enthusiasm for Home and For-
eign, 218 et seq.
Mission Schools

Dr. Girardeau's Method of Con-
ducting, 147-148.

Negroes

Dr. Girardeau's Letter to Dr.
Mallard on Negro Work, 73-
81 ; Dr. Girardeau's Report
on Negro Work, 35-51 ; Needs
of, 61-63 ; Plan of Work for,
32-33, 35-51 ; Results of Dr.
Girardeau's Work for, 65-68 ;
Singing of Negroes, 33 ;
White Attendants on Negro
Church, 33 ; Views of Dr.
Girardeau on Work for, 215 ;
Work Among, 31-106.

Palmer, B. M.

Letter from on Occasion of Dr.
Girardeau's Death, 390 ;
Nominates Dr. Girardeau as
Professor in Columbia Sem-
inary, 167 ; One of the Three
Greatest South Carolina
Preachers, 139.

Philosophy

Consciousness as Expounded by
Dr. Girardeau, 289-291 ; Ex-
tent of Dr. Girardeau's De-

terminism, 297-298 ; Explan-
ation of First Sin, 299-300 ;
Mediate Knowledge, 291-292;
Motives as Final Instead of
Efficient Causes, 301 ; Nature
of Faith, 291-295, 399-400;
Reasons Why His Reputation
as Philosopher is for a Time
Obscured, 285 ; Standpoint as
Philosopher, 287 ; Validity of
Our Knowledge of Infinite,
406-419 ; Will, 295.

Poems by Dr. Girardeau, 345-364.

Prophecy, Views of Dr. Girardeau
on, 372 et seq.

Reid, B. P.

Estimate of Dr. Girardeau as a
Teacher by, 205 et seq.
Revival, Great

Regarded as Greatest in Dr.
Girardeau's Ministry, 99-100.

Sabbath School

Methods of Dr. Girardeau in

Sabbath School Work, 144-

146.
"Sermons on Important Subjects,"

364.

Thornwell, J. H.

Influence on Dr. Girardeau,
307 ; Joined with Girardeau,
339 ; Rank as Preacher, 139.

Theologian

Biblical Character of Dr. Girar-
deau as Theologian, 305 ;
Confessional Theologian, 306 ;
Likeness as Theologian to
John Calvin, 307 ; Relation
of Theology to Philosophy,
304.

Theology

Adoption, 333-336 ; Arguments
for the Divine Existence,
313-319 ; Difference between
His Theology and That of
Dr. Dabney, 367 ; Federal
Headship, 324-329 ; Infinite
Element Involved in Theol-

432

Index

ogy, 393 ; Origin of First Sin,
319 ; Parentalism, 319-322 ;
Person of Christ, 329-333 ;
Proof that Theology is a
Science, 308-312 ; Prophecy,
Dr. Girardeau's Views Given
by Dr. Bryan, 372-376; Real-
ism, 322-324 ; Science, The-
ology is a, 419-423 ; Type of
Theology Taught by Dr.
Girardeau, 338.

osopher, 285 ; on The Theo-
logian, 304.

"Will in Its Theological Rela-
tions," 197 et seq.

Woodrow, James

Share in Evolution Contro-
versy, 232 et seq. ; Debates
with Dr. Girardeau in
Charleston Assembly, 221 et
seq.

Webb, R. A.

Author of Articles on "The
Presbyter," 208 ; on "The
Evolution Controversy," 231 ;
Son-in-law of Dr. Girardeau,
28.
Whaling, Thornton

Author of Article on The Phil-

Zion Church

Consolidated with Glebe Street
Church, 136 ; Organization
and Constitution of, 81-98 ;
Scattered by War, 134 ; Shut
Out by Freedmen's Bureau,
136.

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

0035520060

938.21
G44

\

BRITTtEDO m
PHOTOCOPIf